4.4 Article

Effects of Microbial Additives on Chemical Composition and Fermentation Characteristics of Barley Silage

Journal

ASIAN-AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCES
Volume 27, Issue 4, Pages 511-517

Publisher

ASIAN-AUSTRALASIAN ASSOC ANIMAL PRODUCTION SOC
DOI: 10.5713/ajas.2013.13617

Keywords

Aerobic Stability; Bacterial Inoculant; Barley Silage; Fermentation Indices

Funding

  1. Cooperative Research Program for Agriculture Science and Technology Development Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea [PJ0097752013]
  2. BK21Plus Program, the Ministry of Education, Republic of Korea

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined the effects of bacterial inoculants on chemical composition and fermentation indices of barley silage. Barley forage (Youngyang) was harvested at 24% dry matter (DM) and wilted to 47.9% DM. The wilted barley forage was chopped to 3-5 cm length and applied with no inoculant (CON), L. plantarum (1x10(10) cfu/g, LP) or Effective Microorganisms (0.5x10(9) cfu/g, EM). Then the forages were ensiled in four replications for each treatment in 20 L mini silos and stored for 100 days. The contents of crude protein and ether extract were higher in CON silage ensiled for 100-d, while the contents of DM and crude ash were higher in EM silage (p<0.05). The contents of ADF, NDF and hemicellulose as well as the in vitro DM digestibility were not affected by microbial inoculation (p>0.05). The pH, ammonia-N concentration and lactate to acetate ratio were higher (p<0.05) in CON silage, while lactate concentrations were higher (p<0.05) in CON and LP silage. Acetate concentration and lactic acid bacteria was increased (p<0.05) by both inoculants (LP and EM), but propionate concentration and yeast was increased (p<0.05) by EM and LP, respectively. These results indicated that the fermentation quality of barley silage was improved by the application of bacterial inoculants.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available