Envestigation of addiing different levels of bacterial inoculant (Lactobacillus plantarum) when preparing common reed silage and comparing it with corn silage

Document Type : (original research)

Author

Animal Science Research Department, Safiabad Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extention (AREEO), Dezful, Iran

Abstract

This study was conducted to investigat the effect of different levels of addition of lactobacillus plantarum inoculant of common reed silage and also to compare this silage with corn silage in a compeletly randomized design with 8 treatments and 4 replication. Treatments included of common reed silage without inoculation, common reed silage with bacterial inoculation (2.5 mg/kg DM) and other treatments were inoculants silages with addition bacteria in 25, 50, 75 and 100 percent above of commercial amount, respectively and corn silage with or without bacterial inoculation (2.5 and 0 mg/kg DM). Inoculated common reed silage and corn silage were ensiled in laboratory silos (2-L- plastic jars). At the end of ensilage duration and sampeling of silge, laboratory analysis included pH, DM, CP, IVDMD, IVOMD and VFA's of silages were down. Results of this experiment indicated that inoculants of common reed silage with different levels of lactobacillus bacteria had significant effect on pH, ash and In vitro digestibility (p<0.05) but did not influence CP and VFA's (p>0.05). Inoculation of corn silage did not influence pH, CP, In vitro digestibility, propionic acid and butyric acid (p>0.05) but it had significant effect on ash and acetic acid of silages (p<0.05). According to results of experiment and considering studied factors and the inoculation influences on In vitro digestibility, pH and VFA's, it seems that bacterial inoculation of common reed silage with 75 percent above of standard level had the best results and this addition level is recommended.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Mashaykhi, M.R. and Ghorbani, G.R., 2005. Variation of chemical composition and digestibility of common reed forage during growth stage and characteristices of reed forage ensilage. Pajouhesh & Sazandegi. 18(3): 93-98. (In Persian)
  2. McDonald, P., Henderson, A.R. and Heron S.J.E., 2012. Biochemistry of silage. second edition. Translation: Valizadeh, R., Naserian, A. and Azhdari Fred, A., Publications of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. 414 p. (In Persian)
  3. Cho, N.I., Yoon, C.S., Lea, N.H. and Chee, K.M., 1989. Effect of lactobacillus plantrum inoculation and molasses supplementation to a rice straw, wheat bran, poultry manure silage on its fermentation charactristics. Nutri. Abster. And Revi. 060-02800.
  4. Castle, M.E. and Watson, J.N., 1985. Silage and milk production: studies with molasses and formic acid as additives for silage. Gress and Forage Sci. 40: 85-92.
  5. Umana, R., Staples, C.R., Bates, D.B., Wilcox, C.J. and Mahanna, W.C., 1991. Effect of a microbial inoculants and(or) sugarcane molasses on the fermentation, aerobic stability and digestibility of bermodagrass ensiled at two moisture contents. J. Anim. Sci. 69(11): 4588-4601
  6. Harrison, J.H. and Blauwiekel, R., 1994. Fermentation and utilization of grass silage. J. Dairy Sci. 7: 3209-3235.
  7. Tilley, J.M.A. and Terry, R.A., 1963. A two stage technique for invitro digestion of forage crops. J. British Grassl. Soc. 18: 104-111.
  8. SAS Institute. 2003. User’s guide: statistics. sas Institute Inc., Cary, NC. DR.M.
  9. Sanderson, M.A., 1993. Aerobic stability and in vitro fiber digestibility of microbially inoculated corn and sorghum silages. J. Anim. Sci. 71(2): 505-514
  10. Yan, T., Patterson, D.C., Gordon, F.J. and Kilpatrick, D.J., 1998. Effect of microbial inoculants of unwilted and wilted grass silages.1. Rumen microbial activity, silage nutrient degradability and digestibility. J. Agricul. Sci. 131: 103-112.
  11. Baskavak, S., Ozduven, M.L. Polat, C. and Koc, F., 2008. The effects of lactic acid bacteria+enzyme mixture silage inoculants on wheat silage. J. Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty. 5(3): 291-296.
  12. Adesogan, T., 2008. Recent advances in bacterial silage inoculants technology. January 29-30. Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium. University of Florida, Gainesville. 16 p.
  13. Nikpour Tehrani, K., Morvarid, A.A., Shamaa, M. and Saedi, H., 1366. Livestock and poultry foods and their preservation methods. The second volume (Principles of livestock and poultry nutrition). Tehran University Press. 174-212. (In Persian)
  14. Chamberlain, D.G., Marthin, P.A., Robertson, S.R., and Hunter, E.A., 1992. Effects of the type of additive and type of supplement on the utilization of grass silage for milk production hn dairy cows. Grass and Forage Sci. 47: 391-399.
  15. Meeske, R., Basson, H.M. and Cruywagen, C., 1999. The effect of a lactic acid bacterial inoculants with enzymes on the fermentation dynamics, intake and digestibility of Digitaria eriantha silage. Anim. Feed Sci. and Techno. 81(3-4): 237-248.
  16. Weinberg, Z.G., Chen, Y. and Gamburg, M., 2004. The passage of lactic acid bacteria from silage into rumen fluid, In vitro studies. J. Dairy Sci. 87: 3386-3397.
  17. Hristov, A.H. and McAllister, T.A., 2002. Effect of inoculants on whole-crop barley silage fermentation and dry matter disappearance in situ. J. Anim. Sci. 80(2): 510-516.
  18. Nadeau, E.M., Russell, J.R. and Buxton, D.R., 2000. Intake, digestibility and composition of orchardgrass and alfalfa silages treated with celluase, inoculants, and formic acid fed to lambs. J. Anim. Sci.78(11): 2980-2989.
Journal of Animal Environment
Volume 13, Issue 4
January 2022
Pages 83-88

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics