SHORT COMMUNICATION
Effects of ensiling density on chemical and microbiological characteristics of sorghum silage
| 1 | Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Diamantina, MG, 39100-000, Brazil |
| 2 | Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Montes Claros, MG, 39404-547, Brazil |
| 3 | Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia Fluminense, Bom Jesus do Itabapoana, RJ, 28300-000, Brazil |
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
L.D. da Silva
Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Diamantina, MG, 39100-000, Brazil
Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Diamantina, MG, 39100-000, Brazil
Publication date: 2017-03-21
J. Anim. Feed Sci. 2017;26(1):65–69
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of ensiling density
on chemical and microbiological characteristics of sorghum silage. Thirty-six minisilos
made of PVC with a volume of 3.1 dm3 were used. A completely randomized
design was used with six replications per each treatment. The treatments differed
in packing density: 300, 375, 450, 525, 600 and 675 kg of fresh forage per m3.
The contents of dry matter (DM), crude protein and the count of lactic acid bacteria
tended to increase with increasing packing density. The highest DM contents
were observed for silages with density of 525 kg · m−3. The contents of organic
matter, water-soluble carbohydrates, ammoniacal nitrogen, acid detergent fibre,
hemicellulose, cellulose and nitrogen insoluble in neutral and acid detergents
were not affected by silage density. However, the contents of neutral detergent
fibre, lignin, pH values, yeast and mould counts and the DM losses tended to
decrease together with increasing silage density. It was observed that the silage
with the highest density resulted in lower DM losses when compared to the silage
densities lower than 525 kg · m−3. So, it can be stated that the minimum density
of sorghum silage ensuring its quality is 525 kg · m−3.
REFERENCES (15)
1.
AOAC, 1990. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 15th Edition. Arlington, VA (USA)
2.
DuBois M., Gilles K.A., Hamilton J.K., Rebers P.A., Smith F., 1956. Colorometric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Anal. Chem. 28, 350–356, https://doi.org/10.1021/ac6011...
3.
Getachew G., Putnam D.H., De Ben C.M., De Peters E.J., 2016. Potential of sorghum as an alternative to corn forage. Am. J. Plant. Sci. 7, 1106–1121, https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2...
4.
Gxasheka M., Tyasi T.L., Qin N., Lyu Z.-C., 2015. An overview of tannins rich plants as alternative supplementation on ruminant animals: A Review. Int. J. Agric. Res. Rev. 3, 343–349
5.
Licitra G., Hernandez T.M., Van Soest P.J., 1996. Standardization of procedures for nitrogen fractionation of ruminant feeds. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 57, 347–358, https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8...
6.
McDonald P., Henderson A.R., Heron S.J.E. (Editors), 1991. The Biochemistry of Silage. 2nd Edition. Chalcombe Publications. Mallow, Bucks (UK), https://doi.org/10.1017/S00144...
7.
Mertens D.R., 2002. Gravimetric determination of amylase-treated neutral detergent fibre in feeds with refluxing in beaker or crucibles: collaborative study. J. AOAC Int. 85, 1217–1240
8.
Muck R.E., Holmes B.J., 2000. Factors affecting bunker silo densities. Appl. Eng. Agric. 16, 613–619, https://doi.org/10.13031/2013....
9.
Pahlow G., Muck R.E., Driehuis F., Oude Elferink S.J.W.H., Spoelstra S.F., 2003. Microbiology of ensiling. In: D.R. Buxton, R.E. Muck, J.H. Harrison (Editors). Silage Science and Technology. American Society of Agronomy, Inc, Crop Science Society of America, Inc., Soil Science Society of America, Inc. Publishers. Madison, WI (USA), pp. 31–94
10.
Robertson J.B., Van Soest P.J., 1981. The detergent system of analysis and its application to human foods. In: W.P.T. James, O. Theander (Editors). The analysis of dietary fibre in food. Marcel Dekker. New York, NY (USA), pp. 123–158
11.
Ruppel K.A., Pitt R.E., Chase L.E., Galton D.M., 1995. Bunker silo management and its relationship to forage preservation on dairy farms. J. Dairy Sci. 78, 141–153, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0...
12.
Sucu E., Kalkan H., Canbolat O., Filya I., 2016. Effects of ensiling density on nutritive value of maize and sorghum silages. R. Bras. Zootec. 45, 596–603, https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-...
13.
Valadares Filho S.C., Machado P.A.S., Chizzotti M.L., Amaral H.F., Magalhães K.A., Rocha V.R. Jr., Capelle E.R., 2016. Table of Food Composition for Cattle – CQBAL 3.0. Available on www.ufv.br/cqbal (Accessed on February 05, 2017)
14.
Velho J.P., Mühlbach P.R.F., Nörnberg J.L., Velho I.M.P.H., Genro T.C.M., Kessler J. D., 2007. Chemical composition of maize silages with different packing densities (in Portuguese). R. Bras. Zootec. 36, 1532–1538, https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-...
15.
Woolford M.K., 1990. The detrimental effects of air on silage. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 68, 101–116, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365...
RELATED ARTICLE
Assigning DOI numbers, introducing articles from supplements and recent publications to POL-index database, maintaining anti-plagiarism detection, electronic system to proceed manuscripts and webpage of the Journal with interactive pdf files, and language correction of manuscripts published in Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences are financed in the years 2018–2019 by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education from the funds for science popularization activities, Agreement No. 631/P-DUN/2018.
