Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5713/ajas.20.0388

Effect of storage time and the level of formic acid on fermentation characteristics, epiphytic microflora, carbohydrate components and in vitro digestibility of rice straw silage  

Zhao, Jie (Institute of Ensiling and Processing of Grass, College of Agro-grassland Science, Nanjing Agricultural University)
Wang, Siran (Institute of Ensiling and Processing of Grass, College of Agro-grassland Science, Nanjing Agricultural University)
Dong, Zhihao (Institute of Ensiling and Processing of Grass, College of Agro-grassland Science, Nanjing Agricultural University)
Li, Junfeng (Institute of Ensiling and Processing of Grass, College of Agro-grassland Science, Nanjing Agricultural University)
Jia, Yushan (Key Laboratory of Forage Cultivation, Processing and High Efficient Utilization of Ministry of Agriculture, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University)
Shao, Tao (Institute of Ensiling and Processing of Grass, College of Agro-grassland Science, Nanjing Agricultural University)
Publication Information
Animal Bioscience / v.34, no.6, 2021 , pp. 1038-1048 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objective: The study aimed to evaluate the effect of storage time and formic acid (FA) on fermentation characteristics, epiphytic microflora, carbohydrate components and in vitro digestibility of rice straw silage. Methods: Fresh rice straw was ensiled with four levels of FA (0%, 0.2%, 0.4%, and 0.6% of fresh weight) for 3, 6, 9, 15, 30, and 60 d. At each time point, the silos were opened and sampled for chemical and microbial analyses. Meanwhile, the fresh and 60-d ensiled rice straw were further subjected to in vitro analyses. Results: The results showed that 0.2% and 0.6% FA both produced well-preserved silages with low pH value and undetected butyric acid, whereas it was converse for 0.4% FA. The populations of enterobacteria, yeasts, moulds and aerobic bacteria were suppressed by 0.2% and 0.6% FA, resulting in lower dry matter loss, ammonia nitrogen and ethanol content (p<0.05). The increase of FA linearly (p<0.001) decreased neutral detergent fibre and hemicellulose, linearly (p<0.001) increased residual water soluble carbohydrate, glucose, fructose and xylose. The in vitro gas production of rice straw was decreased by ensilage but the initial gas production rate was increased, and further improved by FA application (p<0.05). No obvious difference of FA application on in vitro digestibility of dry matter, neutral detergent fibre, and acid detergent fibre was observed (p>0.05). Conclusion: The 0.2% FA application level promoted lactic acid fermentation while 0.6% FA restricted all microbial fermentation of rice straw silages. Rice straw ensiled with 0.2% FA or 0.6% FA improved its nutrient preservation without affecting digestion, with the 0.6% FA level best.
Keywords
Formic Acid; Fermentation Type; Epiphytic Microflora; Carbohydrate Components; In vitro Fermentation; Rice Straw Silage;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Fijalkowska M, Przemieniecki SW, Purwin C, Lipinski K, Kurowski TP, Karwowska A. The effect of an additive containing three Lactobacillus species on the fermentation pattern and microbiological status of silage. J Sci Food Agric 2020;100:1174-84. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.10126   DOI
2 Dibner JJ, Buttin P. Use of organic acids as a model to study the impact of gut microflora on nutrition and metabolism. J Appl Poult Res 2002;11:453-63. https://doi.org/10.1093/japr/11.4.453   DOI
3 Jaakkola S, Rinne M, Heikkila T, Toivonen V, Huhtanen P. Effects of restriction of silage fermentation with formic acid on milk production. Agric Food Sci 2006;15:200-18. https://doi.org/10.2137/145960606779216290   DOI
4 Zhang M, Qi W, Liu R, Su R, Wu S, He Z. Fractionating lignocellulose by formic acid: characterization of major components. Biomass Bioenergy 2010;34:525-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.12.018   DOI
5 Zhou S, Liu L, Wang B, Xu F, Sun R. Microwave-enhanced extraction of lignin from birch in formic acid: structural characterization and antioxidant activity study. Process Biochem 2012;47:1799-806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2012.06.006   DOI
6 Deng C, Lin R, Cheng J, Murphy JD. Can acid pre-treatment enhance biohydrogen and biomethane production from grass silage in single-stage and two-stage fermentation processes? Energy Convers Manag 2019;195:738-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.05.044   DOI
7 Getachew G, Blummel M, Makkar HPS, Becker K. In vitro gas measuring techniques for assessment of nutritional quality of feeds: a review. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1998;72:261-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(97)00189-2   DOI
8 Aksu T, Baytok E, Karsli MA, Muruz H. Effects of formic acid, molasses and inoculant additives on corn silage composition, organic matter digestibility and microbial protein synthesis in sheep. Small Rumin Res 2006;61:29-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2004.12.013   DOI
9 Li P, Ji S, Wang Q, Qin M, Hou C, Shen Y. Adding sweet potato vines improve the quality of rice straw silage. Anim Sci J 2017;88:625-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12690   DOI
10 Zhao J, Dong Z, Li J, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria and molasses on fermentation dynamics, structural and nonstructural carbohydrate composition and in vitro ruminal fermentation of rice straw silage. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2019;32:783-91. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.18.0543   DOI
11 Chamberlain DG, Quig J. The effects of the rate of addition of formic acid and sulphuric acid on the ensilage of perennial ryegrass in laboratory silos. J Sci Food Agric 1987;38:217-28. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740380305   DOI
12 Broderick GA, Kang JH. Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and total amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro media. J Dairy Sci 1980;63:64-75. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(80)82888-8   DOI
13 Yuan X, Wen A, Dong Z, Desta ST, Shao T. Effects of formic acid and potassium diformate on the fermentation quality, chemical composition and aerobic stability of alfalfa silage. Grass Forage Sci 2017;72:833-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/gfs.12296   DOI
14 Ren H, Wang C, Fan W, Zhang B, Li Z, Li D. Effects of formic or acetic acid on the storage quality of mixed air-dried corn stover and cabbage waste, and microbial community analysis. Food Technol Biotechnol 2018;56:71-82. https://doi.org/10.17113/ftb.56.01.18.5455   DOI
15 Zhang Q, Yang H, Yu Z. Effects of sucrose, formic acid and lactic acid bacteria inoculant on quality, in vitro rumen digestibility and fermentability of drooping wild ryegrass (Elymus nutans Griseb.) silage. J Anim Feed Sci 2017;26:26-32. https://doi.org/10.22358/jafs/68802/2017   DOI
16 Charmley E, Gill M, Thomas C. The effect of formic acid treatment and the duration of the wilting period on the digestion of silage by young steers. Anim Sci 1990;51:497-504. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100012538   DOI
17 Roughani E, Zamiri MJ. The effects of a microbial inoculant and formic acid as silage additives on chemical composition, ruminal degradability and nutrient digestibility of corn silage in sheep. Iran J Vet Res 2009;10:110-8.
18 He L, Wang C, Xing Y, et al. Dynamics of proteolysis, protease activity and bacterial community of Neolamarckia cadamba leaves silage and the effects of formic acid and Lactobacillus farciminis. Bioresour Technol 2019;294:122127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122127   DOI
19 Playne MJ, McDonald P. The buffering constituents of herbage and of silage. J Sci Food Agric 1966;17:264-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740170609   DOI
20 Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 1991;74:3583-97. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2   DOI
21 Thomas TA. An automated procedure for the determination of soluble carbohydrates in herbage. J Sci Food Agric 1977;28:639-42. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740280711   DOI
22 Desta ST, Yuan X, Li J, Shao T. Ensiling characteristics, structural and nonstructural carbohydrate composition and enzymatic digestibility of Napier grass ensiled with additives. Bioresour Technol 2016;221:447-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.09.068   DOI
23 McDonald P, Henderson AR, Heron SJE. The biochemistry of silage. 2nd ed. Marlow, Bucks, UK: Chalcombe Publication; 1991.
24 Takahashi T, Horiguchi K, Goto M. Effect of crushing unhulled rice and the addition of fermented juice of epiphytic lactic acid bacteria on the fermentation quality of whole crop rice silage, and its digestibility and rumen fermentation status in sheep. Anim Sci J 2005;76:353-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-0929.2005.00275.x   DOI
25 Menke KH. Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Anim Res Dev 1988;28:7-55.
26 Blummel M, Karsli A, Russell JR. Influence of diet on growth yields of rumen micro-organisms in vitro and in vivo: influence on growth yield of variable carbon fluxes to fermentation products. Br J Nutr 2003;90:625-34. https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN2003934   DOI
27 Cai Y, Benno Y, Ogawa M, Kumai S. Effect of applying lactic acid bacteria isolated from forage crops on fermentation characteristics and aerobic deterioration of silage. J Dairy Sci 1999;82:520-6. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75263-X   DOI
28 Leibeinsperger RY, Pitt RE. Modeling the effects of formic acid and molasses on ensilage. J Dairy Sci 1988;71:1220-31. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(88)79677-0   DOI
29 Jaakkola S, Kaunisto V, Huhtanen P. Volatile fatty acid proportions and microbial protein synthesis in the rumen of cattle receiving grass silage ensiled with different rates of formic acid. Grass Forage Sci 2006;61:282-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.2006.00532.x   DOI
30 Avila CLS, Carvalho BF. Silage fermentation-updates focusing on the performance of micro-organisms. J Appl Microbiol 2020;128:966-84. https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.14450   DOI