不同青贮添加剂对甜高粱青贮品质的影响
|
摘要
目的:探讨不同青贮添加剂对甜高粱青贮品质的影响,为获得优质的甜高粱青贮饲料提供理论依据。方法:以甜高粱为青贮原料,依据添加剂用量分别分为5个处理组,每组3个重复:Ⅰ组(对照,无添加剂)、Ⅱ组(酶制剂,0.033g/kg,FM)、Ⅲ组(绿汁发酵液,2mL/kg,FM)、Ⅳ组(乳酸菌制剂,0.01g/kg,FM)以及Ⅴ组(酶制剂+乳酸菌制剂,0.033g/kg+0.01g/kg,FM),处理后的青贮饲料每袋60kg,密封,60d后开袋进行感官和实验室评定。结果:青贮添加剂对甜高粱青贮饲料的感官品质和养分含量有影响。Ⅴ组青贮料呈黄绿色,芳香味浓,有淡淡的面包香,茎叶结构稍受到破坏,感官品质最佳,1级优等;Ⅱ、Ⅲ和Ⅳ组均呈淡黄色,有淡芳香味,2级良好;Ⅰ组品质稍差,呈黄褐色,酸香味弱,并伴有微弱的丁酸味。Ⅲ、Ⅳ和Ⅴ组pH值均显著低于Ⅰ组(P<0.05),Ⅱ组pH值无明显变化;Ⅲ、Ⅳ、Ⅴ组中性洗涤纤维(NDF)和酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)含量均显著低于Ⅰ组(P<0.05),Ⅱ组NDF和ADF含量与Ⅰ组无差异(P>0.05);Ⅲ、Ⅳ和Ⅴ组粗蛋白(CP)含量均显著高于Ⅰ组(P<0.05),分别高出3.58%、2.43%和6.51%,Ⅱ组CP显著低于Ⅰ组。结论:青贮添加剂可以提高CP含量,有效降低青贮料pH值、NDF和ADF含量,抑制有害微生物的存活。综合感官和实验室评价,Ⅴ组感官评价为最优,最适pH值为3.58;CP含量最高,NDF和ADF含量显著降低,营养价值最高。
Objective:The effects of different silage additives on the quality of sweet sorghum silage wereinvestigated for high quality.Methods:Sweet sorghum was divided into five treatment groups accordingto additives as silage material.Each group had three replicates:group I(control,no additives),groupII(enzyme preparation,0.033 g/kg,FM),group III(green juice fermentation broth,2 mL/kg,FM),group IV(lactobacillus preparation,0.01 g/kg,FM)and group V(enzyme preparation+ Lactobacilluspreparation(0.033 g/kg+0.01 g/kg,FM),the treated silage was packed with 60 kg each,sealed,andopened for sensory and laboratory evaluation.Results:Silage Additives affect the sensory quality andnutrient content of sweet sorghum silage.Group V silage showed yellowish green color,strong aroma,light bread fragrance,slightly destroyed stem and leaf structure,the best sensory quality,grade 1;group II,group III and group IV were pale yellow,light aroma,grade 2;group I was slightly poor inquality,yellow brown,weak sour fragrance,and accompanied by weak butyric acid flavor.The pHvalue of group III,group IV and group V was significantly lower than that of group I(P<0.05),whilethe pH value of group II had no significant change.The contents of NDF and ADF in group III,groupIV and group V were significantly lower than those in group I(P<0.05),and the contents of NDF andADF in group II were not significantly different from those in group I(P> 0.05).The contents ofprotein(CP)in group II were significantly higher than those in group I(P< 0.05),which were3.58%,2.43%and 6.51%,respectively.CP in group II was significantly lower than that in group I.Conclusion:Silage additives can increase CP content,effectively reduce pH value,NDF and ADFcontent of silage,and inhibit the survival of harmful microorganisms.Comprehensive sensory evaluationand laboratory evaluation showed that the sensory evaluation of group V was the best with the best pHvalue 3.58;CP content was the highest,NDF and ADF contents were significantly reduced,andnutritional value was the highest.
Objective:The effects of different silage additives on the quality of sweet sorghum silage wereinvestigated for high quality.Methods:Sweet sorghum was divided into five treatment groups accordingto additives as silage material.Each group had three replicates:group I(control,no additives),groupII(enzyme preparation,0.033 g/kg,FM),group III(green juice fermentation broth,2 mL/kg,FM),group IV(lactobacillus preparation,0.01 g/kg,FM)and group V(enzyme preparation+ Lactobacilluspreparation(0.033 g/kg+0.01 g/kg,FM),the treated silage was packed with 60 kg each,sealed,andopened for sensory and laboratory evaluation.Results:Silage Additives affect the sensory quality andnutrient content of sweet sorghum silage.Group V silage showed yellowish green color,strong aroma,light bread fragrance,slightly destroyed stem and leaf structure,the best sensory quality,grade 1;group II,group III and group IV were pale yellow,light aroma,grade 2;group I was slightly poor inquality,yellow brown,weak sour fragrance,and accompanied by weak butyric acid flavor.The pHvalue of group III,group IV and group V was significantly lower than that of group I(P<0.05),whilethe pH value of group II had no significant change.The contents of NDF and ADF in group III,groupIV and group V were significantly lower than those in group I(P<0.05),and the contents of NDF andADF in group II were not significantly different from those in group I(P> 0.05).The contents ofprotein(CP)in group II were significantly higher than those in group I(P< 0.05),which were3.58%,2.43%and 6.51%,respectively.CP in group II was significantly lower than that in group I.Conclusion:Silage additives can increase CP content,effectively reduce pH value,NDF and ADFcontent of silage,and inhibit the survival of harmful microorganisms.Comprehensive sensory evaluationand laboratory evaluation showed that the sensory evaluation of group V was the best with the best pHvalue 3.58;CP content was the highest,NDF and ADF contents were significantly reduced,andnutritional value was the highest.
引文
[1] 张苏江,董志国,杨金宝.饲用甜高梁的栽培与利用[J].畜牧兽医杂志,2000,19(2):31-33.
[2] 张丽敏,刘智全,陈冰嬬,等.我国能源甜高粱育种现状及应用前景[J].中国农业大学学报,2012,17(6):76-82.
[3] 葛江丽,姜闯道,石雷,等.甜高粱研究进展[J].安徽农业科学,2006(22):5815-5816,5892.
[4] 郭艳萍,玉柱,顾雪莹,等.不同添加剂对高粱青贮质量的影响[J].草地学报,2010,18(6):875-879.
[5] 刘美华,王栋,席琳乔,等.不同生育期的青贮玉米青贮前后的养分比较[J].粮食与饲料工业,2014(6):48-52.
[6] 徐炜,师尚礼,张文渝,等.不同添加剂对低水分紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].草原与草坪,2014,34(1):49-54.
[7] 马春晖,夏艳军,韩军,等.不同青贮添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].草业学报,2010,19(1):128-133.
[8] 秦立刚,许庆方,董宽虎,等.不同添加剂对甜高粱青贮品质影响的研究[J].中国畜牧兽医,2010,37(12):27-30.
[9] 李富国.青贮水稻秸发酵品质及其饲喂肉牛效果的研究[D].哈尔滨:东北农业大学,2013.
[10] 张子仪.中国饲料学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000.
[11] ZHU Y,NISHINO N,KISHIDA Y,et al.Ensiling characteristics and ruminal degradation of Italian ryegrass and lu-cerne silages treated with cell wall-degrading enzymes[J].J SCI FOOD AGR,1999,79(14):1987-1992.
[12] 杨胜.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].北京:北京农业大学出版社,1993.
[13] 董妙音,王曙阳,姜伯玲,等.添加不同的青贮菌剂对甜高粱青贮品质的影响[J].饲料工业,2016,37(1):28-31.
[14] 张苏江,艾买尔江·吾斯曼,薛兴中,等.南疆玉米和不同糖分甜高粱的青贮品质分析[J].草业学报,2014,23(3):232-240.
[15] 华金玲,张永根,王德福,等.添加乳酸菌制剂对水稻秸青贮品质的影响[J].东北农业大学学报,2007(4):473-477.
[16] 王林,张慧杰,玉柱,等.苜蓿与直穗鹅观草混贮发酵品质研究[J].草业科学,2011,28(10):1888-1893.
[17] 刘佳莉,方芳,史煦涵,等.2株盐碱地燕麦根际促生菌的筛选及其促生作用研究[J].草业学报,2013,22(2):132-139.
[18] 武慧娟,陈本建.不同添加剂对苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].甘肃畜牧兽医,2015,45(3):37-39,45.
[19] 许庆方,张翔,崔志文,等.不同添加剂对全株玉米青贮品质的影响[J].草地学报,2009,17(2):157-161.
[20] 云颖,赵苗苗,双胡尔,等.刈割期和添加剂对苜蓿青贮发酵品质和CNCPS蛋白组分的影响[J].草业科学,2017,34(10):2149-2156.
[21] MCENIRY J,O'KIELY P,CLIPSON N,et al.The relative impacts of wilting,chopping,compaction and air infiltrationon the conservation characteristics of ensiled grass[J].GRASS FORAGE SCI,2007,62(4):470-484.
[22] 侯建建,娜日苏,罗海玲,等.切碎长度对不同牧草青贮饲料发酵品质的影响[J].中国奶牛,2016(6):10-14.
[23] 赵政,陈学文,朱梅芳,等.添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对玉米秸秆青贮饲料品质的影响[J].广西农业科学,2009,40(7):919-922.
[24] 玉柱,孙启忠,于艳冬,等.添加尿素和乳酸菌制剂对玉米秸秆青贮料品质的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志,2009,45(3):37-40.
[25] 刘圈炜,郑心力,王峰,等.复合乳酸菌制剂对玉米秸秆青贮饲料品质的影响[J].饲料研究,2013(1):41-43.
[2] 张丽敏,刘智全,陈冰嬬,等.我国能源甜高粱育种现状及应用前景[J].中国农业大学学报,2012,17(6):76-82.
[3] 葛江丽,姜闯道,石雷,等.甜高粱研究进展[J].安徽农业科学,2006(22):5815-5816,5892.
[4] 郭艳萍,玉柱,顾雪莹,等.不同添加剂对高粱青贮质量的影响[J].草地学报,2010,18(6):875-879.
[5] 刘美华,王栋,席琳乔,等.不同生育期的青贮玉米青贮前后的养分比较[J].粮食与饲料工业,2014(6):48-52.
[6] 徐炜,师尚礼,张文渝,等.不同添加剂对低水分紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].草原与草坪,2014,34(1):49-54.
[7] 马春晖,夏艳军,韩军,等.不同青贮添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].草业学报,2010,19(1):128-133.
[8] 秦立刚,许庆方,董宽虎,等.不同添加剂对甜高粱青贮品质影响的研究[J].中国畜牧兽医,2010,37(12):27-30.
[9] 李富国.青贮水稻秸发酵品质及其饲喂肉牛效果的研究[D].哈尔滨:东北农业大学,2013.
[10] 张子仪.中国饲料学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000.
[11] ZHU Y,NISHINO N,KISHIDA Y,et al.Ensiling characteristics and ruminal degradation of Italian ryegrass and lu-cerne silages treated with cell wall-degrading enzymes[J].J SCI FOOD AGR,1999,79(14):1987-1992.
[12] 杨胜.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].北京:北京农业大学出版社,1993.
[13] 董妙音,王曙阳,姜伯玲,等.添加不同的青贮菌剂对甜高粱青贮品质的影响[J].饲料工业,2016,37(1):28-31.
[14] 张苏江,艾买尔江·吾斯曼,薛兴中,等.南疆玉米和不同糖分甜高粱的青贮品质分析[J].草业学报,2014,23(3):232-240.
[15] 华金玲,张永根,王德福,等.添加乳酸菌制剂对水稻秸青贮品质的影响[J].东北农业大学学报,2007(4):473-477.
[16] 王林,张慧杰,玉柱,等.苜蓿与直穗鹅观草混贮发酵品质研究[J].草业科学,2011,28(10):1888-1893.
[17] 刘佳莉,方芳,史煦涵,等.2株盐碱地燕麦根际促生菌的筛选及其促生作用研究[J].草业学报,2013,22(2):132-139.
[18] 武慧娟,陈本建.不同添加剂对苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].甘肃畜牧兽医,2015,45(3):37-39,45.
[19] 许庆方,张翔,崔志文,等.不同添加剂对全株玉米青贮品质的影响[J].草地学报,2009,17(2):157-161.
[20] 云颖,赵苗苗,双胡尔,等.刈割期和添加剂对苜蓿青贮发酵品质和CNCPS蛋白组分的影响[J].草业科学,2017,34(10):2149-2156.
[21] MCENIRY J,O'KIELY P,CLIPSON N,et al.The relative impacts of wilting,chopping,compaction and air infiltrationon the conservation characteristics of ensiled grass[J].GRASS FORAGE SCI,2007,62(4):470-484.
[22] 侯建建,娜日苏,罗海玲,等.切碎长度对不同牧草青贮饲料发酵品质的影响[J].中国奶牛,2016(6):10-14.
[23] 赵政,陈学文,朱梅芳,等.添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对玉米秸秆青贮饲料品质的影响[J].广西农业科学,2009,40(7):919-922.
[24] 玉柱,孙启忠,于艳冬,等.添加尿素和乳酸菌制剂对玉米秸秆青贮料品质的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志,2009,45(3):37-40.
[25] 刘圈炜,郑心力,王峰,等.复合乳酸菌制剂对玉米秸秆青贮饲料品质的影响[J].饲料研究,2013(1):41-43.