不同种类添加剂对青贮饲料品质影响的研究进展

doi:10.12160/j.issn.1672-5190.2024.05.007

畜牧与饲料科学 ›› 2024, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (5): 52-62.doi: 10.12160/j.issn.1672-5190.2024.05.007

不同种类添加剂对青贮饲料品质影响的研究进展

陈文静^1,2, 叶君^2,3, 路战远^2,3, 王伟妮⁴, 刘俊梅⁴, 李兵^1,2, 代亚博^1,2, 姜晓平⁵, 王登云⁵, 段锐⁵, 李娟^1,2, 张德健^1,2

1.内蒙古大学牧草与特色作物生物学教育部重点实验室,内蒙古呼和浩特 010021;
2.内蒙古大学生命科学学院,内蒙古呼和浩特 010021;
3.内蒙古自治区农牧业科学院,内蒙古呼和浩特 010031;
4.鄂尔多斯市农牧业生态与资源保护中心,内蒙古鄂尔多斯 017000;
5.磴口县农牧业技术推广中心,内蒙古磴口 015200

收稿日期:2024-07-21 出版日期:2024-09-30 发布日期:2024-11-29
通讯作者: 李娟（1986—）,女,副教授,博士,主要从事作物学研究工作。张德健（1972—）,男,教授,博士,博士生导师,主要从事旱作农业及农田生态治理研究工作。
作者简介:陈文静（1999—）,女,硕士研究生,主要研究方向为植物资源学与植物化学。叶君（1983—）,男,副研究员,博士,主要从事作物育种与栽培耕作技术研究工作。陈文静、叶君为共同第一作者。
基金资助:
鄂尔多斯市“揭榜挂帅”项目（JBGS-2021-001）; 内蒙古农牧业创新基金项目（2022CXJJN05）; 内蒙古自治区自然科学基金项目（2024MS03007）; “草原英才”工程领军人才（路战远）经费; 内蒙古自治区2022年科技领军人才团队项目（2022LJRC0010）

Research Progress on the Impacts of Different Types of Additives on Fermentation Quality of Silage

CHEN Wenjing^1,2, YE Jun^2,3, LU Zhanyuan^2,3, WANG Weini⁴, LIU Junmei⁴, LI Bing^1,2, DAI Yabo^1,2, JIANG Xiaoping⁵, WANG Dengyun⁵, DUAN Rui⁵, LI Juan^1,2, ZHANG Dejian^1,2

1. Key Laboratory of Forage and Endemic Crop Biology,Ministry of Education,Inner Mongolia University,Hohhot 010021,China;
2. College of Life Sciences,Inner Mongolia University,Hohhot 010021,China;
3. Inner Mongolia Academy of Agricultural and Animal Husbandry Sciences,Hohhot 010031,China;
4. Agricultural and Animal Husbandry Ecology and Resource Conservation Center of Ordos City,Ordos 017000,China;
5. Agricultural and Animal Husbandry Technology Promotion Center of Dengkou County,Dengkou 015200,China

Received:2024-07-21 Online:2024-09-30 Published:2024-11-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 在饲料青贮过程中,依靠青贮原料单独发酵无法完全达到厌氧环境,不仅导致青贮饲料的pH值和氨态氮含量升高、乳酸含量下降,还可能引起不良微生物发酵,进而影响青贮效果。为了减少青贮饲料发酵过程中营养物质的损失,提高青贮饲料的发酵品质和营养价值,在制作青贮饲料时经常使用添加剂。常用的青贮饲料添加剂主要分为细菌接种剂、酶制剂、发酵抑制剂、非蛋白氮四大类。不同类型的添加剂通过不同方式改善青贮饲料的发酵品质,进而提高营养价值和饲喂效果。综述了不同种类添加剂对青贮饲料感官品质、发酵品质及微生物多样性影响的研究进展,以期为青贮饲料添加剂的科学选用提供参考。

关键词: 青贮饲料, 发酵品质, 细菌接种剂, 酶制剂, 发酵抑制剂, 非蛋白氮

Abstract: During the process of silage, the anaerobic environment can not be completely achieved by fermentation of silage raw materials alone, which not only results in the increase of pH value and ammonia nitrogen content as well as the decrease of lactic acid content in silage, but also may lead to the fermentation of undesirable microorganisms, affecting the effect of silage. To reduce the loss of nutrients during the fermentation process of silage and to improve the fermentation quality and nutritional value of silage, additives are commonly used in silage preparation. The frequently used additives for silage mainly include the following four types: bacterial inoculants, enzyme preparations, fermentation inhibitors and non-protein nitrogen. Different types of additives improve the fermentation quality of silage through varied ways, further ameliorating the nutritional value and feeding effect of silage. This paper reviewed the research progress on the impacts of different types of additives on sensory quality, fermentation quality and microbial diversity of silage, in hoping to provide a reference for the scientific selection of silage additives.

Key words: silage, fermentation quality, bacterial inoculant, enzyme preparation, fermentation inhibitor, non-protein nitrogen

中图分类号:

S816.7

陈文静, 叶君, 路战远, 王伟妮, 刘俊梅, 李兵, 代亚博, 姜晓平, 王登云, 段锐, 李娟, 张德健. 不同种类添加剂对青贮饲料品质影响的研究进展[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2024, 45(5): 52-62.

CHEN Wenjing, YE Jun, LU Zhanyuan, WANG Weini, LIU Junmei, LI Bing, DAI Yabo, JIANG Xiaoping, WANG Dengyun, DUAN Rui, LI Juan, ZHANG Dejian. Research Progress on the Impacts of Different Types of Additives on Fermentation Quality of Silage[J]. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2024, 45(5): 52-62.

参考文献

[1] DONG L F, ZHANG H S, GAO Y H, et al.Dynamic profiles of fermentation characteristics and bacterial community composition of Broussonetia papyrifera ensiled with perennial ryegrass[J].Bioresource Technology,2020,310:123396.
[2] 刘青,厉广辉,张学峰,等.油莎豆-花生秧混合青贮饲料制备及评价[J].山东农业科学,2021,53(12):78-82.
[3] 严毅梅. 青贮饲料添加剂研究综述[J].中国饲料添加剂,2021(1):13-15,19.
[4] 谷丽,杨磊,王祎.青贮饲料添加剂的研究进展[J].农业技术与装备,2022(8):87-89.
[5] WANG S R, ZHANG G J, ZHAO J, et al.Fermentation quality, aerobic stability and in vitro gas production kinetics and digestibility in total mixed ration silage treated with lactic acid bacteria inoculants and antimicrobial additives[J].Italian Journal of Animal Science,2023,22(1):430-441.
[6] 李雨晨,于福生,张振华,等.牧草添加剂青贮技术的研究进展[J].吉林畜牧兽医,2014,35(5):21-23.
[7] 屠焰,刁其玉,吴秋珏,等.一种青贮饲料二次发酵抑制剂:CN202110026343.5[P].2021-04-09.
[8] 丁孝忠. 非蛋白氮在养羊业中的应用[J].畜牧兽医科技信息,2016(5):61-62.
[9] 王彦丽,张永灿,王冠军,等.常见营养性饲料添加剂及其作用[J].中国饲料添加剂,2016(3):16-19.
[10] 徐晓锋,张力莉.奶牛饲料资源利用与日粮质量监控[M].银川:宁夏人民出版社,2018.
[11] 李旭业,董扬,尤海洋,等.不同类型添加剂对玉米秸秆青贮品质的影响[J].饲料研究,2024,47(5):99-103.
[12] 高燕春,袁凯,刘爱菊.不同微生物发酵剂对青贮玉米营养成分、感官评定及发酵品质的影响[J].中国饲料,2024(2):76-79.
[13] 汤磊. 添加剂对西藏农作物秸秆与牧草混合青贮发酵品质的影响[D].南京:南京农业大学,2013.
[14] WU P W, LI L H, JIANG J F, et al.Effects of fermentative and non-fermentative additives on silage quality and anaerobic digestion performance of Pennisetum purpureum[J].Bioresource Technology,2020,297:122425.
[15] LV J Y, FANG X P, FENG G Z, et al.Effects of sodium formate and calcium propionate additives on the fermentation quality and microbial community of wet brewers grains after short-term storage[J].Animals,2020,10(9):1608.
[16] 于浩然,格根图,王志军,等.甲酸添加剂及青贮时间对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].草业学报,2020,29(3):89-95.
[17] 内蒙古自治区市场监督管理局.天然牧草青贮品质评价:DB15/T 2992—2023[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2023.
[18] ARRIOLA K G, OLIVEIRA A S, JIANG Y, et al.Meta-analysis of effects of inoculation with Lactobacillus buchneri, with or without other bacteria, on silage fermentation, aerobic stability, and performance of dairy cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2021,104(7):7653-7670.
[19] NI K K, ZHAO J Y, ZHU B G, et al.Assessing the fermentation quality and microbial community of the mixed silage of forage soybean with crop corn or Sorghum[J].Bioresource Technology,2018,265:563-567.
[20] YANG L L, YUAN X J, LI J F, et al.Dynamics of microbial community and fermentation quality during ensiling of sterile and nonsterile alfalfa with or without Lactobacillus plantarum inoculant[J].Bioresource Technology,2019,275:280-287.
[21] GE G T, HOU M L, LIU T Y, et al.Microbial population, chemical composition and silage fermentation of native grasses growing on the Inner Mongolian Plateau[J].Grassland Science,2018,64(4):226-233.
[22] REN F Y, HE R C, ZHOU X K, et al.Dynamic changes in fermentation profiles and bacterial community composition during sugarcane top silage fermentation:A preliminary study[J].Bioresource Technology,2019,285:121315.
[23] WANG S R, SHAO T, LI J F, et al.Fermentation profiles, bacterial community compositions, and their predicted functional characteristics of grass silage in response to epiphytic microbiota on legume forages[J].Frontiers in Microbiology,2022,13:830888.
[24] OLIVEIRA A S, WEINBERG Z G, OGUNADE I M, et al.Meta-analysis of effects of inoculation with homofermentative and facultative heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria on silage fermentation, aerobic stability, and the performance of dairy cows[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2017,100(6):4587-4603.
[25] NAZAR M, ULLAH M W, WANG S R, et al.Exploring the epiphytic microbial community structure of forage crops:Their adaptation and contribution to the fermentation quality of forage Sorghum during ensiling[J].Bioengineering,2022,9(9):428.
[26] 张男吉,刘江莉,林波,等.青绿饲料附生微生物组成特点及其对青贮品质影响的研究进展[J].动物营养学报,2023,35(5):2828-2835.
[27] 热孜姑丽·库尔班,崔卫东,龙宣杞,等.乳酸菌对青贮饲料发酵品质影响的研究进展[J].饲料研究,2023,46(19):155-158.
[28] CARVALHO B F, SALES G F C, SCHWAN R F, et al. Criteria for lactic acid bacteria screening to enhance silage quality[J].Journal of Applied Microbiology,2021,130(2):341-355.
[29] 李菲菲,张凡凡,王旭哲,等.同/异型发酵乳酸菌对全株玉米青贮营养成分和瘤胃降解特征的影响[J].草业学报,2019,28(6):128-136.
[30] 靳思玉,李苗苗,王立超,等.不同处理对斜茎黄芪青贮发酵品质及黄酮含量的影响[J].黑龙江畜牧兽医,2020(6):107-111.
[31] 黄秋连,周昕,王健,等.添加乳酸菌、糖蜜和无机酸对羊草青贮饲料发酵品质及体外干物质消失率的影响[J].动物营养学报,2021,33(1):420-427.
[32] 杨晶晶,孙芸,吴庆宇,等.乳酸菌和留茬高度对受风灾倒伏全株玉米青贮发酵品质及微生物组成的影响[J].动物营养学报,2022,34(4):2542-2556.
[33] 黄丽萍,陈颖,黄杏秀,等.不同添加剂对全株玉米青贮发酵品质及营养成分的影响[J].饲料研究,2021,44(10):74-78.
[34] 赵熙来,谭鼎,葛锐,等.残次香梨与乳酸菌组合对四翅滨藜青贮的影响[J/OL].中国饲料,2024:1-7.[2024-06-20].https://doi.org/10.15906/j.cnki.cn11-2975/s.2023080004-04.
[35] WU Z, LUO Y N, BAO J Z, et al.Additives affect the distribution of metabolic profile, microbial communities and antibiotic resistance genes in high-moisture sweet corn kernel silage[J].Bioresource Technology, 2020, 315:123821.
[36] 易启轩,王鹏.生物性添加剂在青贮饲料中的研究进展[J].动物营养学报,2023,35(3):1475-1488.
[37] 王丽学,韩静,陈龙宾,等.5种乳酸菌对苜蓿青贮营养和发酵品质的影响[J].饲料研究,2019,42(1):104-108.
[38] CHO S B, KANG J S, CHO K J, et al.Effects of the use of homo type fermentation and hetero type fermentation Lactobacillus on the quality and expiratory stability of silage:A meta-analysis[J].Journal of Grassland Research,2014,34(4):247-253.
[39] 杨琪. 两种商用乳酸菌添加剂对全株玉米青贮品质的影响[D].哈尔滨:东北农业大学,2023.
[40] ZHAO X L, LIU J H, LIU J J, et al.Effect of ensiling and silage additives on biogas production and microbial community dynamics during anaerobic digestion of switchgrass[J].Bioresource Technology,2017,241:349-359.
[41] DROUIN P, MARI L J, SCHMIDT R J.Lactic acid bacteria as microbial silage additives:Current status and future outlook[M]//ROSA M M E. New advances on fermentation processes. London:IntechOpen,2020.
[42] LIU C, LAI Y J, LU X N, et al.Effect of lactic acid bacteria inoculants on alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) silage quality:Assessment of degradation (in situ) and gas production (in vitro)[J].Journal of Integrative Agriculture,2016,15(12):2834-2841.
[43] LI D X, NI K K, ZHANG Y C, et al.Influence of lactic acid bacteria, cellulase, cellulase-producing Bacillus pumilus and their combinations on alfalfa silage quality[J].Journal of Integrative Agriculture,2018,17(12):2768-2782.
[44] BAI J, DING Z T, KE W C, et al.Different lactic acid bacteria and their combinations regulated the fermentation process of ensiled alfalfa:Ensiling characteristics, dynamics of bacterial community and their functional shifts[J].Microbial Biotechnology,2021,14(3):1171-1182.
[45] 陈勇辉,韩乐,钱玲亚,等.植物乳杆菌对不同含水量多花黑麦草青贮品质的影响[J].江西畜牧兽医杂志,2023(4):41-44.
[46] WORKU A, TÓTHI R, OROSZ S, et al. Novel mixtures of Italian ryegrass and winter cereals:Influence of ensiling on nutritional composition, fermentation characteristics, microbial counts and ruminal degradability[J].Italian Journal of Animal Science,2021,20(1):749-761.
[47] 鲜欧洋,李肖,陈永成,等.糖蜜和植物乳杆菌对啤酒花枝叶青贮品质、微生物数量及瘤胃降解率的影响[J].新疆农业科学,2024,61(3):719-726.
[48] 贺婷婷. 不同青贮调制技术对油莎豆茎叶青贮品质影响的研究[D].石河子:石河子大学,2021.
[49] CHAUHAN N, KUMARI N, MISHRA D B, et al.Dynamic changes in microbial succession and fermentation profiles of sugarcane tops silage treated with exogenous enzymes and lactic acid bacteria following various duration of ensiling[J].Sugar Tech,2023,25(3):592-602.
[50] ZHANG J W, LIU Y C, WANG Z J, et al.Effects of different types of LAB on dynamic fermentation quality and microbial community of native grass silage during anaerobic fermentation and aerobic exposure[J].Microorganisms,2023,11(2):513.
[51] ZHANG Q, WU Z, YU Z, et al.Effect of lactic acid bacteria inoculants on fermentation characteristics and aerobic stability of three native grasses in Mongolian steppe[J].Grassland Science,2018,64(3):199-206.
[52] 司丙文,王宗礼,孙启忠,等.尖叶胡枝子青贮微生物数量变化及发酵特性[J].草业科学,2012,29(4):650-657.
[53] 倪凯伦. 酶制剂在猪饲料中的应用[J].广东饲料,2023,32(6):34-36.
[54] 中华人民共和国农业农村部.中华人民共和国农业农村部公告第2045号[EB/OL].(2017-12-04)[2024-06-20].http://www.moa.gov.cn/nybgb/2014/dyq/201712/t20171219_6104350.htm.
[55] 董文滨. 我国饲用微生物和酶制剂种类的变化及应用前景[J].中国饲料添加剂,2019(1):1-3.
[56] 冯定远. 饲料酶制剂应用技术与产业开发现状和展望[J].饲料工业,2018,39(17):1-6.
[57] 冯骁骋. 天然草地牧草青贮机理及品质调控研究[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2014.
[58] 门宇新. 添加乳酸菌制剂和酶制剂对水稻秸青贮发酵品质的影响[D].哈尔滨:东北农业大学,2007.
[59] 苏海鸣,王晓春,马晓霞,等.复合菌剂与复合酶制剂对青贮玉米发酵品质的影响[J].现代畜牧科技,2023(8):29-31.
[60] NAWAZ H.Effect of feeding xylanase and cellulase treated oat silage on nutrient digestibility, growth performance and blood metabolites of Nili-Ravi buffalo calves[J].Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2016,53(4):999-1004.
[61] TIAN J P, XU N X, LIU B Y, et al.Interaction effect of silo density and additives on the fermentation quality, microbial counts, chemical composition and in vitro degradability of rice straw silage[J].Bioresource Technology,2020,297:122412.
[62] 陈明,禹爱兵.外源淀粉酶对水化玉米青贮饲料发酵、营养价值及体内消化率的影响[J].中国饲料,2020(6):58-62.
[63] REFAT B, CHRISTENSEN D A, MCKINNON J J, et al.Effect of fibrolytic enzymes on lactational performance, feeding behavior, and digestibility in high-producing dairy cows fed a barley silage-based diet[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2018,101(9):7971-7979.
[64] XIA G H, WU C R, ZHANG M Z, et al.The metabolome and bacterial composition of high-moisture Italian ryegrass silage inoculated with lactic acid bacteria during ensiling[J].Biotechnology for Biofuels and Bioproducts,2023,16(1):91.
[65] 张适,吴琼,尤欢,等.添加不同酶制剂对全株玉米青贮发酵品质的影响[J].中国畜牧兽医,2019,46(4):1045-1052.
[66] 吴康乐,曹欣,谢展,等.酶制剂对绿狐尾藻、稻秸粉与玉米粉混合青贮品质的影响[J].草业科学,2021,38(12):2490-2496.
[67] 黄丽娟,吴康乐,曹欣,等.酶制剂和有机酸盐对绿狐尾藻与稻秸混合青贮的影响[J].中国草地学报,2022,44(11):114-120.
[68] 白长胜. 乳酸菌和纤维素酶微贮发酵大豆秸秆过程中pH和微生物的变化[J].中国饲料,2022(19):140-143.
[69] XU D M, DING Z T, BAI J, et al.Evaluation of the effect of feruloyl esterase-producing Lactobacillus plantarum and cellulase pretreatments on lignocellulosic degradation and cellulose conversion of co-ensiled corn stalk and potato pulp[J].Bioresource Technology,2020,310:123476.
[70] 邓宗澳. 不同添加剂组合使用对甘蔗梢玉米秸秆混合青贮品质的影响[D].昆明:云南农业大学,2023.
[71] 姚美玲,李伟,林秀蔚,等.不同剂量糖蜜和复合菌酶制剂对鲜食玉米秸秆青贮品质的影响[J].动物营养学报,2024,36(3):1987-1996.
[72] GHELLER L S, GHIZZI L G, TAKIYA C S, et al.Different organic acid preparations on fermentation and microbiological profile, chemical composition, and aerobic stability of whole-plant corn silage[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,2021,281:115083.
[73] HUHTANEN P, JAAKKOLA S, NOUSIAINEN J.An overview of silage research in Finland:From ensiling innovation to advances in dairy cow feeding[J].Agricultural and Food Science,2013,22(1):35-56.
[74] 贾冬文,曹阳.优质安全青贮饲料用添加剂研究进展[J].饲料工业,2024,45(12):53-58.
[75] 王青兰,谢展,张志飞.有机酸盐在青贮发酵中的应用研究进展[J].草学,2020(6):13-18,29.
[76] KUNG L, SMITH M L, BENJAMIM DA SILVA E, et al. An evaluation of the effectiveness of a chemical additive based on sodium benzoate, potassium sorbate, and sodium nitrite on the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2018,101(7):5949-5960.
[77] 高冲亚,温芷莹,吴龙飞,等.不同有机酸对翅荚决明青贮品质及营养成分的影响[J].饲料工业,2022,43(13):28-31.
[78] ZHANG Y, LIU Y, MENG Q, et al.A mixture of potassium sorbate and sodium benzoate improved fermentation quality of whole-plant corn silage by shifting bacterial communities[J].Journal of Applied Microbiology,2020,128(5):1312-1323.
[79] QUEIROZ O C M, ARRIOLA K G, DANIEL J L P, et al. Effects of 8 chemical and bacterial additives on the quality of corn silage[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2013,96(9):5836-5843.
[80] 李俊峰,成启明,卢强,等.乙酸添加量及青贮时间对紫花苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].黑龙江畜牧兽医,2021(8):114-118.
[81] 徐圣明. 有机酸及其盐对紫花苜蓿混合青贮品质及有氧稳定性的影响[D].长沙:湖南农业大学,2020.
[82] 李茂,字学娟,刁其玉,等.添加有机酸改善木薯叶青贮品质和营养成分[J].热带作物学报,2019,40(7):1312-1316.
[83] 王亚芳,姜富贵,成海建,等.不同青贮添加剂对全株玉米青贮营养价值、发酵品质和瘤胃降解率的影响[J].动物营养学报,2020,32(6):2765-2774.
[84] 谢展,穆麟,张志飞,等.乳酸菌或有机酸盐与尿素复配添加对紫花苜蓿混合青贮的影响[J].草业学报,2021,30(5):165-173.
[85] 巴尔古丽·苏甫尔.甲醛添加及贮后不同开封方式对新苏2号苏丹草青贮饲料二次发酵的影响研究[D].乌鲁木齐:新疆农业大学,2017.
[86] 孙林,娜娜,房永雨,等.添加剂与贮藏时间对天然牧草颗粒化学成分及其颗粒表面微生物数量的影响[J].草业科学,2021,38(12):2497-2506.
[87] DAI T T, DONG D, WANG S R, et al.Assessment of organic acid salts on fermentation quality, aerobic stability, and in vitro rumen digestibility of total mixed ration silage[J].Tropical Animal Health and Production,2022,54(5):261.
[88] WEN A Y, YUAN X J, WANG J, et al.Effects of four short-chain fatty acids or salts on dynamics of fermentation and microbial characteristics of alfalfa silage[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,2017,223:141-148.
[89] KNICKY M, SPORNDLY R.Use of a mixture of sodium nitrite, sodium benzoate, and potassium sorbate in aerobically challenged silages[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2015,98(8):5729-5734.
[90] 黄飞鸿. 添加泡沫抑制剂对啤酒发酵产生的影响[J].科技传播,2013,5(11):76.
[91] TSERMOULA P, BECHSHØFT M R, FRIIS C, et al. Screening of non-protein nitrogen compounds in lactose refining streams from industrial whey permeate processing[J].Food Chemistry,2023,405:134716.
[92] 王天武,王腾达,张玉晶,等.非蛋白氮在反刍动物生产中的研究进展[J].饲料研究,2023,46(7):138-141.
[93] 郭伟,李文娟,呼秀智,等.反刍动物低蛋白日粮应用的研究进展[J].饲料工业,2020,41(1):47-51.
[94] DEWHURST R J, NEWBOLD J R.Effect of ammonia concentration on rumen microbial protein production in vitro[J].British Journal of Nutrition,2022,127(6):847-849.
[95] 马学增,付祖陵,林陵芳,等.玉米秸青贮添加非蛋白氮的研究[J].中国畜牧杂志,1980,16(5):20-22.
[96] HUSON K M, MEEHAN E J, ALLEN M, et al.Comparison of the effects of calcium ammonium nitrate and stabilized urea fertilizers on grass and silage yields and quality[J].Grass and Forage Science,2023,78(4):547-562.
[97] 伏桂华,杨宝良,张飞,等.尿素对全株玉米青贮饲料发酵品质和饲料营养价值的影响[J].饲料研究,2021,44(14):117-119.
[98] 陈丽军,王忠艳,李施垚,等.尿素和糖蜜添加比例对玉米秸秆青贮效果的影响[J].饲料博览,2019(6):6-8,14.
[99] 农丽容,李顺芳,梁淑芳,等.不同尿素浓度对桑秆、桑叶青贮饲料营养成分及品质的影响[J].饲料研究,2022,45(13):102-104.
[100] SAMINATHAN M, WAN MOHAMED W N, NOH M, et al. Effects of urea-treated oil palm frond on nutrient composition and in vitro rumen fermentation using goat rumen fluid[J].Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition,2022,106(6):1228-1237.
[101] HOU Z P, ZHENG X, ZHANG X L, et al.Effects of urea supplementation on the nutritional quality and microbial community of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) silage[J].Archives of Microbiology,2022,204(7):414.
[102] 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):442-451.
[103] DADASHI A, ROUZBEHAN Y, FAZAELI H, et al.The nutritional quality of a fresh orange pulp-wheat straw mixture ensiled with either sugar beet pulp, wheat bran, or urea compared to corn silage (Zea mays) in sheep[J].Translational Animal Science,2023,7(1):17.
[104] 王燕燕,张艳丽,高博,等.不同添加剂对全株玉米与紫花苜蓿混合青贮发酵效果的影响[J].饲料研究,2022,45(15):110-113.
[105] 谢展,穆麟,张志飞,等.尿素对紫花苜蓿和稻秸与豆粕混合青贮的影响[J].湖南农业大学学报(自然科学版),2022,48(4):483-487.
[106] 熊聪. 添加剂对稻秸和麦麸混合青贮效果研究[D].长沙:湖南农业大学,2021.
[107] 谭树义,魏立民,王峰,等.尿素对苏丹草青贮发酵品质的影响[J].中国饲料,2014(17):18-19,22.
[108] CHEN L Y, QU H, BAI S Q, et al.Effect of wet sea buckthorn pomace utilized as an additive on silage fermentation profile and bacterial community composition of alfalfa[J].Bioresource Technology,2020,314:123773.
[109] 郭艳萍,玉柱,顾雪莹,等.丙酸和尿素对全株玉米青贮发酵品质和有氧稳定性的影响[C]//中国草学会青年工作委员会学术研讨会论文集(下册).北京:中国草学会,2010:10-16.
[110] 魏杰. 不同添加剂对燕麦草青贮品质和体外消化率的影响[J].饲料研究,2023,46(5):113-117.
[111] DOS SANTOS A P M, SANTOS E M, DE OLIVEIRA J S, et al. Effects of urea addition on the fermentation of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) silage[J].African Journal of Range and Forage Science,2018,35(1):55-62.

不同种类添加剂对青贮饲料品质影响的研究进展

Research Progress on the Impacts of Different Types of Additives on Fermentation Quality of Silage

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	杨华, 伏春燕, 刘雪兰, 张亨. 日粮中添加复合酶制剂和复合微生态制剂对AA肉鸡生长性能、血清生化指标及抗氧化能力、小肠形态发育的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2024, 45(5): 18-24.
[2]	李东洋, 乌尼尔, 娜娜, 孙林, 杨宝珠, 李鹅, 薛艳林. 不同填装密度下添加乳酸菌和糖对小麦秸秆黄贮饲料发酵品质及微生物群落的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2024, 45(2): 9-19.
[3]	李小冬, 于二汝, 洪莉平, 尚以顺, 裴成江, 罗近平, 陈才俊. 玉米秸秆与金针菇菌糠不同混合比例对发酵全混合日粮营养品质和霉菌毒素含量的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2024, 45(2): 20-28.
[4]	宫斌, 李帅宏, 范彩云, 武欣燕, 王典, 兰儒冰, 陆兴伟, 卓钊, 王菊花, 程建波. 杂交构树适宜收割高度与青贮加工工艺参数研究[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2023, 44(5): 39-47.
[5]	罗欢, 罗皎兰, 梁琼, 易显凤, 黄世洋. 复合菌不同添加量对热研4号王草青贮饲料营养价值及发酵品质的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2023, 44(3): 27-32.
[6]	罗皎兰, 罗欢, 曾俊, 易显凤, 邱进宝, 黄世洋. 添加不同比例木薯酒精渣对桂闽引象草微贮品质的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2023, 44(2): 44-49.
[7]	刘永军, 李梦吉, 马燕芬, 王德志. 不同微生物菌剂与压实密度对玉米青贮营养成分及发酵品质的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2023, 44(2): 55-60.
[8]	刘宗正, 邹明, 檀学进, 曹瑞, 肖娜, 宋修瑜, 刘迎春. 菌酶协同对里岔黑猪断奶仔猪生长性能、血清免疫指标和肠道菌群的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2022, 43(6): 30-35.
[9]	王辉, 代微然, 孙璇, 李舒琦, 任健, 马向丽. 晾晒时间和青贮时间对青贮玉米发酵品质的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2022, 43(4): 25-32.
[10]	韩红燕, 赵启南, 贾淑萍, 张春华, 张永虎, 薛艳林, 孙林, 王超. 含水量和添加剂对饲用谷子青贮营养成分和发酵品质的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2022, 43(3): 30-35.
[11]	王超, 张永虎, 杨飞雁, 娜娜, 孙林, 温蕊, 刘重芷, 薛艳林. 添加糖蜜和植物乳杆菌对谷草黄贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2021, 42(3): 28-31.
[12]	赵峻祥, 李金库, 王雪洋, 刘晨, 孙奉召, 李井春, 魏国生, 李雁冰. 添加不同乳酸菌对青贮玉米和青贮黑麦草发酵品质、有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2021, 42(2): 26-31.
[13]	刘辉, 李金鑫, 鹿瑶, 徐海燕, 谷巍. 布氏乳杆菌和纤维素酶对青贮玉米秸秆品质影响研究[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2021, 42(1): 34-39.
[14]	麦提图尔荪·阿卜杜克热木, 布沙热木·阿布力孜, 乌斯满·依米提. 不同浓度赤霉酸对饲料添加菌生长的影响[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2019, 40(9): 50-53.
[15]	荣荣,贾玉山,包健,侯鑫狄,赵牧其尔,张静,范美超,马天,付智慧,郝俊峰,格根图. 柳树叶饲料化调制加工技术研究[J]. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2019, 40(5): 62-66.