王小琪2, ?,,
李标2,
王琳3,
段子渊2,,
1.宁夏大学农学院 银川 750021
2.中国科学院遗传与发育生物学研究所 北京 100101
3.慕恩(北京)生物科技有限公司 北京 102200
基金项目: 国家重点研发计划重点专项2016YFC0500709
宁夏回族自治区农业综合开发推广项目NTKJ2018-02
详细信息
作者简介:王小平, 研究方向为动物生产、动物肠道菌群与免疫代谢, E-mail:nxuwxp321@163.com
王小琪, 研究方向为动物生产、动物肠道菌群与免疫代谢, E-mail:xqwang@genetics.ac.cn
通讯作者:段子渊, 主要研究方向为动物免疫遗传与代谢。E-mail:zyduan@genetics.ac.cn
?同等贡献者中图分类号:S816.7
计量
文章访问数:192
HTML全文浏览量:2
PDF下载量:130
被引次数:0
出版历程
收稿日期:2020-01-31
录用日期:2020-04-21
刊出日期:2020-08-01
Testing the performance of compound microbial additives in silage maize nutrients and the effect of feeding Tan sheep
WANG Xiaoping1, 2, ?,,WANG Xiaoqi2, ?,,
LI Biao2,
WANG Lin3,
DUAN Ziyuan2,,
1. College of Agriculture, Ningxia University, Yinchuan 750021, China
2. Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
3. Moon(Beijing) Biotech Co., Ltd., Beijing 102200, China
Funds: the National Key Research and Development Project of China2016YFC0500709
the Agricultural Comprehensive Development and Extension Project of Ningxia Hui Autonomous RegionNTKJ2018-02
More Information
Corresponding author:DUAN Ziyuan, E-mail:zyduan@genetics.ac.cn
?Equivalent contributors摘要
HTML全文
图
参考文献
相关文章
施引文献
资源附件
访问统计
摘要
摘要:筛选复配适合宁夏地区的青贮微生物菌剂，可解决在青贮自然发酵过程中，青贮玉米营养损失多且易发霉等问题。本研究对从宁夏中部干旱区自然发酵的青贮玉米饲料中分离鉴定的1株乳酸菌（Lactobacillus acidophilus）和1株酵母菌（Saccharomyces cerevisiae）进行性能测定，复配后形成复合菌剂并进行45 d的大型窖贮青贮发酵试验，设置不添加菌剂和添加商业菌剂的青贮饲料为对照组。营养成分测定结果显示，与不加菌剂和添加商业菌剂的对照组相比，经复合菌剂处理后饲料中性洗涤纤维和酸性洗涤纤维显著下降（P < 0.05），干物质和粗脂肪含量显著增加（P < 0.05），粗蛋白含量变化不显著。为期75 d的滩羊肥育饲喂和5 d的消化代谢试验表明，对照组与试验组滩羊的日均采食量差异显著（P < 0.05），平均日增重、末重、料重比差异不显著。试验组滩羊对青贮玉米饲料中粗蛋白、粗脂肪表观消化率显著提高（P < 0.05），中性洗涤纤维表观消化率提高，对酸性洗涤纤维的表观消化率影响不显著。结果表明，复合菌剂显著改善了青贮玉米饲料的品质，复合菌剂发酵的饲料玉米对滩羊生长有良好的促进作用。
关键词:复合菌剂/
青贮玉米/
营养成分/
滩羊/
生长性能/
表观消化率
Abstract:Silage can be affected by a variety of factors during fermentation, which reduce its feed and fattening qualities. We selected and combined silage microbial additives to address the problems that occur during the natural fermentation of silage maize, such as nutrient loss and mold. The performance of a compound of one strain of lactic acid bacteria (Lactobacillus acidophilus) and one strain of yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae), which were isolated from mixed silage maize collected in multiple spots in the central arid area of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, China, were tested. The compound lactic acid bacteria-yeast strain microbial additive was inoculated into silage maize; at the same time, silage without and with commercial microbial additives were set as the control group. The nutritional composition was determined after a 45-d fermentation period. The results indicated that the neutral detergent fibers (NDF) and acid detergent fibers (ADF) of the feed decreased significantly after treatment with compound microbial additives, while the dry matter content and ether extract (EE) increased significantly. The degradation of crude protein (CP) was slightly inhibited, although this was not significantly different to the control. The 75-d fattening study and 5-d digestive and metabolic experiments for Tan sheep showed that the average daily feed intake significantly increased, while the difference in the average daily grain, final weight and ratio of feed to gain were not statistically significant. During the course of fattening, the final body weight, average daily gain, and feed efficiency increased. Then, the digestive and metabolic experiments for Tan sheep were showing that the apparent digestibility for CP and EE were significant increased. NDF tends to increased, while the different in the apparent digestibility of ADF was statistically insignificant. Thus, it is clear that the compound microbial additives noticeably improved the feed quality of silage and that silage maize inoculated with compound microbial additives facilitated the growth performance of Tan sheep.
Key words:Compound microbial additives/
Silage maize/
Nutrient composition/
Tan sheep/
Growth performance/
Apparent digestibility
?Equivalent contributors
注释:
1) ?同等贡献者
HTML全文
图1分离的乳酸菌pH(a)及乳酸菌和酵母菌OD值(b)的动态变化
Figure1.Dynamic changes of pH of isolated lactobacillus (a) and the OD value of isolated lactobacillus and yeast (b)
下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片表1滩羊饲喂试验对照和添加菌剂处理的饲粮组成及营养水平
Table1.Composition and nutrient level of diet of the control and compound microbial additives treatments of the Tan sheep feeding experiment
| 对照Control | 处理Treatment | ||
| 原料 Raw material (%) | 无菌剂青贮玉米Silage maize without additives | 50 | 0 |
| 有菌剂青贮玉米Silage maize with additives | 0 | 50 | |
| 羊草 Leymus chinensis | 20 | 20 | |
| 精料补充料1) Concentrate supplement1) | 30 | 30 | |
| 合计Total | 100 | 100 | |
| 营养水平2) Nutrition level2) | 代谢能Metabolic energy (MJ·kg-1) | 10.46 | 10.21 |
| 粗蛋白Crude protein (g·kg-1) | 119.3 | 114.5 | |
| 中性洗涤纤维Neutral detergent fiber (g·kg-1) | 402.7 | 377.9 | |
| 酸性洗涤纤维Acid detergent fiber (g·kg-1) | 210.6 | 194.1 | |
| 粗脂肪Ether extract (g·kg-1) | 26.4 | 29.0 | |
| 钙Calcium (g·kg-1) | 8.9 | 9.3 | |
| 磷Phosphorus (g·kg-1) | 3.9 | 4.1 | |
| 1)精料补充料配比:玉米55.0%, 豆粕10.0%, 菜籽粕11.0%, 棉粕7.0%, 玉米蛋白粉8.0%, 石粉2.0%, 食盐2.0%, 碳酸氢钙1.0%, 苏打1.0%, 氧化镁1.0%, 氯化铵1.0%, 复合预混料1.0%。2)代谢能为计算值, 其余营养成分为实测值。1) Ingredients of concentrate supplement: corn 55.0%, soybean meal 10.0%, rapeseed meal 11.0%, cottonseed meal 7.0%, corn protein powder 8.0%, stone powder 2.0%, table salt 2.0%, calcium bicarbonate 1.0%, soda 1.0%, magnesium oxide 1.0%, ammonium chloride 1.0%, composite premix 1.0%. 2) Metabolic energy is calculated value, the rest of the nutrition components are measured data. | |||
下载: 导出CSV表2添加不同菌剂发酵后青贮玉米的饲料营养成分
Table2.Nutrients composition of silage maize before and after fermentation with different microbial additives
| 营养成分 Nutrient composition | 原料玉米 Raw maize | 处理A Treatment A | 处理B Treatment B | 处理C Treatment C | 处理D Treatment D |
| 干物质Dry matter (g·kg-1) | 373.5±2.0 | 355.6±2.5c | 360.5±1.2c | 383.9±2.2b | 409.9±1.8a |
| 粗蛋白Crude protein (g·kg-1) | 73.1±1.2 | 81.5±1.0a | 68.4±1.9b | 69.3±2.5b | 72.5±1.5a |
| 粗脂肪Ether extract (g·kg-1) | 18.2±0.3 | 25.7±0.2b | 25.7±0.2b | 23.3±0.1c | 31.0±0.3a |
| 酸性洗涤纤维Acid detergent fiber (g·kg-1) | 307.8±6.3 | 232.5±4.3a | 234.6±1.2a | 206.5±4.1b | 199.6±2.7c |
| 中性洗涤纤维Neutral detergent fiber (g·kg-1) | 582.4±2.9 | 411.2±1.9b | 454.3±7.0a | 488.2±2.6a | 361.5±4.4c |
| 粗灰分Crude ash (g·kg-1) | 57.0±0.2 | 85.8±0.1a | 39.9±0.4c | 46.4±0.2c | 59.8±0.2b |
| 总氮Total nitrogen (g·kg-1) | 11.7±0.3 | 13.0±0.1 | 10.9±0.2 | 11.1±0.3 | 11.6±0.2 |
| 处理A:对照, 不添加任何菌剂和添加剂, 自然发酵; 处理B:添加2 g?t–1商业菌剂发酵, 活菌总数≥1×1010 CFU?g–1; 处理C:添加3 g?t–1商业菌剂发酵, 活菌总数≥1.5×1010 CFU?g–1; 处理D:添加2.5 g?t–1复合菌剂发酵, 活菌总数≥1×1010 CFU?g–1。同行不同小写字母表示不同处理间在P < 0.05水平差异显著。Treatment A: natural fermentation without any additives; Treatment B: adding 2 g?t–1 commercial microbial additives with ≥1×1010 CFU?g–1 total viable bacteria; Treatment C: adding 3 g?t–1 commercial silage additives with ≥1.5×1010 CFU?g–1 total viable bacteria; Treatment D: adding 2.5 g?t–1 compound microbial additives with ≥1×1010 CFU?g–1 total viable bacteria. Different lowercase letters in the same line mean significant differences among treatments at P < 0.05 level. | |||||
下载: 导出CSV表3复合菌剂青贮玉米饲料对滩羊生长性能的饲喂效果
Table3.Growth performance of Tan sheep feed with silage maize with compound microbial additives
| 项目Item | 对照Control | 处理Treatment | P |
| 初始体重Initial body weight (kg) | 24.10±0.87 | 23.67±2.14 | 0.761 |
| 末体重Final body weight (kg) | 30.28±1.88 | 32.28±3.31 | 0.413 |
| 日均采食量1) Average daily feed intake1) (g) | 1 490.83±20.65 | 1 582.66±29.60 | < 0.010 |
| 平均日增重Average daily gain (g) | 103.00±17.95 | 143.61±32.17 | 0.129 |
| 料重比Feed/gain | 14.79±1.56 | 11.37±1.36 | 0.174 |
| 1)日均采食量为鲜物质重量。Daily average intake is fresh material weight. | |||
下载: 导出CSV表4复合菌剂青贮玉米饲料对滩羊的表观消化率
Table4.Apparent digestibility of Tan sheep feed with silage maize with compound microbial additives
| 项目Item | 对照Control | 处理Treatment | P |
| 粗蛋白Crude protein (%) | 52.63±3.18 | 71.36±2.01 | 0.001 |
| 中性洗涤纤维Neutral detergent fiber (%) | 37.42±1.66 | 40.10±0.34 | 0.053 |
| 酸性洗涤纤维Acid detergent fiber (%) | 23.21±11.59 | 33.15±1.67 | 0.216 |
| 粗脂肪Ether extract (%) | 77.24±3.54 | 87.54±1.81 | 0.011 |
下载: 导出CSV参考文献
| [1] | 李新, 许志斌, 佘奎军, 等.宁夏玉米产业的现状和发展[J].种子, 2009, 28(9):104-106 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zhongz200909035 LI X, XU Z B, SHE K J, et al. Status and development of maize industry in Ningxia Province[J]. Seed, 2009, 28(9):104-106 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zhongz200909035 |
| [2] | HERRMANN C, IDLER C, HEIERMANN M. Improving aerobic stability and biogas production of maize silage using silage additives[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2015, 197:393-403 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=567593f2d3ed9f48806e0dc07f9d641b |
| [3] | 刘焕财, 王艳君.玉米秸秆青贮饲料的制作与使用[J].吉林农业, 2013, (10):52 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=jlny201320057 LIU H C, WANG Y J. The production and usage of corn straw silage[J]. Jilin Agriculture, 2013, (10):52 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=jlny201320057 |
| [4] | 蒋学勤.宁夏农牧交错带农牧业发展刍议[J].中国农学通报, 2006, 22(5):482-484 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgnxtb200605121 JIANG X Q. Analysis of development of agriculture and husbandry intersection in Ningxia[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2006, 22(5):482-484 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgnxtb200605121 |
| [5] | CAI Y, KUMAI S. The proportion of lactate isomers in farm silage and the influence of inoculation with lactic acid bacteria on the proportion of L-lactate in silage[J]. Nihon Chikusan Gakkaiho, 1994, 65(9):788-795 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=J-STAGE_2038721 |
| [6] | 赵士萍, 周敏, 蒋林树.青贮饲料添加剂的研究进展[J].中国农学通报, 2016, 32(20):6-10 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgnxtb201620002 ZHAO S P, ZHOU M, JIANG L S. Research progress of silage additive[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2016, 32(20):6-10 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgnxtb201620002 |
| [7] | 王小芬, 高丽娟, 杨洪岩, 等.苜蓿青贮过程中乳酸菌复合系Al2的接种效果及菌群的追踪[J].农业工程学报, 2007, 23(1):217-222 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=nygcxb200701042 WANG X F, GAO L J, YANG H Y, et al. Effect of inoculating lactic bacteria community A l2 and microbial shifts during alfalfa ensiling process[J]. Transactions of the CSAE, 2007, 23(1):217-222 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=nygcxb200701042 |
| [8] | 傅彤.微生物接种剂对玉米青贮饲料发酵进程及其品质的影响[D].北京: 中国农业科学院, 2005 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-82101-2005114817.htm FU T. Effect of microbial inoculants on fermentation process and quality of corn silage[D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2005 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-82101-2005114817.htm |
| [9] | 凌代文.乳酸细菌分类鉴定及实验方法[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社, 1999 LING D W. Classification, Identification and Experimental Methods of Lactic Acid Bacteria[M]. Beijing:China Light Industry Press, 1999 |
| [10] | 巴尼特J A.酵母菌的特征与鉴定手册[M].胡瑞卿, 译.青岛: 青岛海洋大学出版社, 1991: 6 BARNETT J A. Yeasts: Characteristics and Identification[M]. HU R Q, trans. Qingdao: Qingdao Ocean University Press, 1991: 6 |
| [11] | WHITTENBURY R. An investigation of the lactic acid bacteria[D]. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, 1961 |
| [12] | 李军训.乳酸菌青贮剂的发酵与生产技术研究[D].泰安: 山东农业大学, 2004 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10434-2005098953.htm LI J X. Study on fermentation and process of silage inoculate lactic acid bacteria[D]. Tai'an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2004 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10434-2005098953.htm |
| [13] | 席兴军.添加剂对玉米秸秆青贮饲料质量影响的试验研究[D].北京: 中国农业大学, 2002 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10019-2002124293.htm XI X J. Effects of additives on the quality of corn stover silage[D]. Beijing: China Agricultural University, 2002 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10019-2002124293.htm |
| [14] | WINTERS A L, COCKBURN J E, DHANOA M S, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria in inoculants on changes in amino acid composition during ensilage of sterile and non-sterile ryegrass[J]. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2000, 89(3):442-452 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=3c2c1d7a3fcd232306c99e7e80460fab |
| [15] | COMINO L, TABACCO E, RIGHI F, et al. Effects of an inoculant containing a Lactobacillus buchneri that produces ferulate-esterase on fermentation products, aerobic stability, and fibre digestibility of maize silage harvested at different stages of maturity[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2014, 198:94-106 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=5309754e3a8edec752702e3275d59339 |
| [16] | 孙旸, 地里百尔·努尔, 林晓琼, 等.酵母和乳酸菌混合发酵对玉米秸秆蛋白质含量的影响[J].吉林农业大学学报, 2016, 38(5):557-561 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=jlnydxxb201605011 SUN Y, DILBAR N, LIN X Q, et al. Effects of mixed fermentation of yeast and lactobacillus on protein content of maize straw[J]. Journal of Jilin Agricultural University, 2016, 38(5):557-561 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=jlnydxxb201605011 |
| [17] | 杨梦婷, 张梦瑶, 徐养滨, 等.添加饲用复合菌剂青贮全株玉米的效果研究[J].饲料工业, 2019, 40(16):22-28 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=silgy201916004 YANG M T, ZANG M Y, XU Y B, et al. Study on the effect of adding compound microbes to silage whole-crop corn[J]. Feed Industry, 2019, 40(16):22-28 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=silgy201916004 |
| [18] | 刘磊, 李福昌, 杨鹏程, 等.饲料粗纤维、中性洗涤纤维和酸性洗涤纤维残渣中各成分的研究[J].动物营养学报, 2018, 30(3):1044-1051 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=dwyyxb201803029 LIU L, LI F C, YANG P C, et al. Study of components in residues of crude fiber, neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber in feed[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2018, 30(3):1044-1051 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=dwyyxb201803029 |
| [19] | TJARDES K E, BUSKIRK D D, ALLEN M S, et al. Neutral detergent fiber concentration of corn silage and rumen inert bulk influences dry matter intake and ruminal digesta kinetics of growing steers[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2002, 80(3):833-840 |
| [20] | 任付平.复合微生物菌剂在全株玉米青贮中的应用与研究[D].西安: 西北大学, 2007 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/article/cdmd-10697-2007130050.htm REN F P. Research and application of compound microbial additives on the whole-crop corn silage[D]. Xi'an: Northwest University, 2007 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/article/cdmd-10697-2007130050.htm |
| [21] | 邱代飞.饲料中粗脂肪两种测定方法的比较探讨[J].广东饲料, 2012, 21(9):40-42 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=gdsl201209022 QIU D F. Comparison of two methods for determination of crude fat in feed[J]. Guangdong Feed, 2012, 21(9):40-42 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=gdsl201209022 |
| [22] | 李旭业, 董扬, 尤海洋, 等.青贮添加剂对全株玉米青贮饲料品质的影响[J].现代畜牧科技, 2017, (2):6-7 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=yzjsgw201702003 LI X Y, DONG Y, YOU H Y, et al. Effect of silage additives on the quality of corn silage[J]. Modern Animal Husbandry Science & Technology, 2017, (2):6 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=yzjsgw201702003 |
| [23] | NKOSI B D, MEESKE R, PALIC D, et al. Effects of ensiling whole crop maize with bacterial inoculants on the fermentation, aerobic stability, and growth performance of lambs[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2009, 154(3/4):193-203 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=da213d261d7a0c0e239e668cde76f600 |
| [24] | BASSO F C, ADESOGAN A T, LARA E C, et al. Effects of feeding corn silage inoculated with microbial additives on the ruminal fermentation, microbial protein yield, and growth performance of lambs[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2014, 92(12):5640-5650 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=7bbdd5a52973c16b7b1d339155dfcaf5 |
| [25] | ANDO S, ISHIDA M, OSHIO S, et al. Effects of isolated and commercial lactic acid bacteria on the silage quality, digestibility, voluntary intake and ruminal fluid characteristics[J]. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2006, 19(3):386-389 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=JAKO200628066507080 |
| [26] | 崔卫东.青贮乳酸菌菌株特性分析与发酵条件研究[D].天津: 天津大学, 2009 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10056-2010093738.htm CUI W D. Study on characteristics and fermentation condition of lactic acid bacteria for silage inoculants[D]. Tianjin: Tianjin University, 2009 http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10056-2010093738.htm |
| [27] | Weinberg Z G, Chen Y, Gamburg M. The passage of lactic acid bacteria from silage into rumen fluid, in vitro studies[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2004, 87(10):3386-3397 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=11f1dcd21da7f87e5404c102cc603e52 |
| [28] | 孟令凯, 郭春华, 彭忠利, 等.微贮牧草对山羊生产性能、饲粮养分消化率和消化道微生物数量的影响[J].饲料工业, 2015, 36(3):48-52 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=silgy201503012 MENG L K, GUO C H, PENG Z L, et al. Effect of microorganism fermented grass on growth performance, nutrient digestion metabolism and digestive tract microorganism quantity of goats[J]. Feed Industry, 2015, 36(3):48-52 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=silgy201503012 |
| [29] | 司雪萌, 张振威, 王彦芦, 等.微生物菌剂处理全株玉米青贮及花生秧添加对小尾寒羊生长性能及养分消化率的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志, 2018, 54(5):79-83 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgxmzz201805016 SI X M, ZHANG Z W, WANG Y L, et al. Effects of different microbial inoculants and peanut vine addition in whole-plant corn silage based total mixed rations on growth performance and nutrient digestibility of small-tailed Han sheep[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2018, 54(5):79-83 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgxmzz201805016 |
