体外产气法评估荞麦秸秆、油菜、苜蓿干草和玉米青贮的组合效应
|
摘要
试验拟采用体外培养技术,通过将荞麦秸秆、油菜、苜蓿干草和青贮玉米进行不同比例的组合搭配,在体外进行培养试验。通过检测多项发酵指标,用以评估这几种粗饲料的组合效应。组合比例(%)为油菜20青贮80,荞麦20苜蓿80,荞麦40苜蓿60,油菜20苜蓿80,油菜40苜蓿60,荞麦20青贮80。每种组合3个重复,采用体外发酵技术,评估每种组合发酵0、3、6、12、24 h的产气量、pH值、干物质消化率、氨态氮浓度、挥发性脂肪酸(VFA)、微生物蛋白(MCP)和甲烷含量,计算不同组合的单项组合效应指数(SFAEI)和多项组合效应指数(MFAEI)。结果显示,各组挥发性脂肪酸的含量随着体外培养时间的增长均呈上升的趋势,油菜20苜蓿80组挥发性脂肪酸总浓度最大。油菜20青贮80平均消化率达到了37.19%,其组合效应综合指数也最高。干物质消化率和产气量最高的为油菜20青贮80组,最小油菜20苜蓿80。各组NH_3-N浓度并无规律性变化。油菜20青贮80组甲烷排放量最低。荞麦20苜蓿80组的微生物蛋白浓度最高。各试验组pH值维持在5.57～5.93,随着培养时间增加略有下降。以MFAEI对各项指标进行评定时发现,油菜20青贮80组合效应值最高,荞麦20苜蓿80组次之。
In this experiment, in vitro culture technology was used to evaluate of different combining proportions of buckwheat straw, rape, alfalfa hay and silage maize. Several fermentation indexes were tested to evaluate the combined effects of these kinds of roughages. Combination ratio(%) was rape 20:silage 80, buckwheat 20:alfalfa 80, buckwheat 40:alfalfa 60, rape 20:alfalfa 80, rape 40:alfalfa 60, buckwheat 20:silage 80. The gas production, pH value, dry matter digestibility, ammonia nitrogen concentration, volatile fatty acid(VFA), microbial protein(MCP) and methane content of each combination at 0, 3, 6, 12 hours and 24 hours were evaluated by in vitro fermentation technology. The single combination effect index(SFAEI) and multiple combinations of different combinations index(MFAEI) were calculated. The results showed that the content of volatile fatty acids in each group increased with the increase of culture time in vitro. The total concentration of volatile fatty acids in rape20:alfalfa 80 group was the highest. The average digestibility of rape 20:silage 80 reached 37.19%,and the composite effect index of rape 20: silage 80 was the highest. The highest dry matter digestibility and gas production was rape 20:silage 80 group and the smallest was rapeseed 20:alfalfa 80 group. The concentration of NH_3-N did not change regularly in each group. Rape 20:silage 80 had the lowest methane emission. Buckwheat 20:alfalfa 80 group had the highest microbial protein concentration. The pH value of each test group was maintained at 5.57～5.93, decreasing with culture time. MFAEI was used to evaluate the indicators. It was found that rape 20:silage 80 had the highest combined effect value, followed by buckwheat 20:alfalfa 80.
In this experiment, in vitro culture technology was used to evaluate of different combining proportions of buckwheat straw, rape, alfalfa hay and silage maize. Several fermentation indexes were tested to evaluate the combined effects of these kinds of roughages. Combination ratio(%) was rape 20:silage 80, buckwheat 20:alfalfa 80, buckwheat 40:alfalfa 60, rape 20:alfalfa 80, rape 40:alfalfa 60, buckwheat 20:silage 80. The gas production, pH value, dry matter digestibility, ammonia nitrogen concentration, volatile fatty acid(VFA), microbial protein(MCP) and methane content of each combination at 0, 3, 6, 12 hours and 24 hours were evaluated by in vitro fermentation technology. The single combination effect index(SFAEI) and multiple combinations of different combinations index(MFAEI) were calculated. The results showed that the content of volatile fatty acids in each group increased with the increase of culture time in vitro. The total concentration of volatile fatty acids in rape20:alfalfa 80 group was the highest. The average digestibility of rape 20:silage 80 reached 37.19%,and the composite effect index of rape 20: silage 80 was the highest. The highest dry matter digestibility and gas production was rape 20:silage 80 group and the smallest was rapeseed 20:alfalfa 80 group. The concentration of NH_3-N did not change regularly in each group. Rape 20:silage 80 had the lowest methane emission. Buckwheat 20:alfalfa 80 group had the highest microbial protein concentration. The pH value of each test group was maintained at 5.57～5.93, decreasing with culture time. MFAEI was used to evaluate the indicators. It was found that rape 20:silage 80 had the highest combined effect value, followed by buckwheat 20:alfalfa 80.
引文
[1]张树林.对农作物秸秆焚烧问题的思考[J].资源与环境科学,2015(20):221-222.
[2]林竞春.荞麦的营养与加工[J].内蒙古农业科技,1986(1):24.
[3]吕育财,崔宗均,王小芬,等.三组微生物菌群分解油菜秸秆的消化液性质比较[J].农业生物环境与能源工程,2012,28(3):210-214.
[4]张吉鹍,包赛娜,邹庆华.稻草与不同饲料混合在体外消化率上的组合效应研究[J].草业科学,2010,27(11):137-144.
[5]布同良.体外产气法评定青贮玉米、羊草和苜蓿草之间的组合效应[D].杭州:浙江大学,2006.
[6]张吉鹍,刘建新.玉米秸秆与苜蓿之间组合效应的综合评定研究[J].饲料博览,2007(5):5-10.
[7]张爱忠.酵母培养物对内蒙古白绒山羊瘤胃发酵及其它生理功能调控作用的研究[D].呼和浩特市:内蒙古农业大学,2005.
[8]冯宗慈,高民.通过比色测定瘤胃液氨态氮含量方法的改进[J].内蒙古畜牧科学,1993(4):40-41.
[9]高静,贾玉山,王晓光,等.饲草组合效应综合指数研究[J].草业学报,2012,21(4):236-243.
[10]王旭.利用GI技术对粗饲料进行科学搭配及绵羊日粮配方系统优化技术的研究[D].呼和浩特市:内蒙古农业大学,2003.
[11]于腾飞,张杰杰,孙国强.花生蔓与4种粗饲料间组合效应的研究[J].动物营养学报,2012,24(7):1246-1254.
[12]唐赛涌.青贮玉米与稻秸之间组合效应的研究[D].黑龙江哈尔滨:东北农业大学,2009.
[13]张一为.体外法评价奶牛日粮中苹果渣麦秸青贮与玉米青贮的组合效应[D].河北:河北农业大学,2015.
[14]张吉鹍,李龙瑞,吴文旋,等.稻草补饲苜蓿对山羊瘤胃发酵的组合效应[J].草业科学,2014(2):313-320.
[15]夏科,王志博,郗伟斌,等.粗饲料组合对奶牛饲粮养分消化率、能量和氮的利用的影响[J].动物营养学报,2012,24(4):681-688.
[16]Blummel M,Bullerdieck P.The need to complement in vitro gas production measurements with residue determinations from in sacco degradabilities to improve the prediction of voluntary intake of hays[J].Animal Science,1997,64:71-75.
[17]唐赛涌.青贮玉米与稻秸之间组合效应的研究[D].黑龙江哈尔滨:东北农业大学,2009.
[18]Huhtanen Pekka.Associative effects of feeds in ruminants[J].Norwegian J.Agric.Sci.,1991(5):37-57.
[19]赵丽媛,彭永佳,王佳堃,等.外源纤维素酶制剂对玉米秸秆体外瘤胃发酵及甲烷产生的影响[C].中国河南郑州:中国畜牧兽医学会动物营养学分会第七届中国饲料营养学术研讨会,2014.
[20]王旭.利用GI技术对粗饲料进行科学搭配及绵羊日粮配方系统优化技术的研究[D].呼和浩特市:内蒙古农业大学,2003.
[21]彭点懿.不同品质粗饲料组合对体外发酵参数、夏季奶牛生产性能及血液生化指标的影响[D].雅安:四川农业大学,2010.
[22]黄聪,陈娟,于凯源,等.体外法评定豆秸与玉米秸、花生蔓和青贮玉米秸的组合效应[J].中国畜牧杂志,2016,52(11):19-23.
[2]林竞春.荞麦的营养与加工[J].内蒙古农业科技,1986(1):24.
[3]吕育财,崔宗均,王小芬,等.三组微生物菌群分解油菜秸秆的消化液性质比较[J].农业生物环境与能源工程,2012,28(3):210-214.
[4]张吉鹍,包赛娜,邹庆华.稻草与不同饲料混合在体外消化率上的组合效应研究[J].草业科学,2010,27(11):137-144.
[5]布同良.体外产气法评定青贮玉米、羊草和苜蓿草之间的组合效应[D].杭州:浙江大学,2006.
[6]张吉鹍,刘建新.玉米秸秆与苜蓿之间组合效应的综合评定研究[J].饲料博览,2007(5):5-10.
[7]张爱忠.酵母培养物对内蒙古白绒山羊瘤胃发酵及其它生理功能调控作用的研究[D].呼和浩特市:内蒙古农业大学,2005.
[8]冯宗慈,高民.通过比色测定瘤胃液氨态氮含量方法的改进[J].内蒙古畜牧科学,1993(4):40-41.
[9]高静,贾玉山,王晓光,等.饲草组合效应综合指数研究[J].草业学报,2012,21(4):236-243.
[10]王旭.利用GI技术对粗饲料进行科学搭配及绵羊日粮配方系统优化技术的研究[D].呼和浩特市:内蒙古农业大学,2003.
[11]于腾飞,张杰杰,孙国强.花生蔓与4种粗饲料间组合效应的研究[J].动物营养学报,2012,24(7):1246-1254.
[12]唐赛涌.青贮玉米与稻秸之间组合效应的研究[D].黑龙江哈尔滨:东北农业大学,2009.
[13]张一为.体外法评价奶牛日粮中苹果渣麦秸青贮与玉米青贮的组合效应[D].河北:河北农业大学,2015.
[14]张吉鹍,李龙瑞,吴文旋,等.稻草补饲苜蓿对山羊瘤胃发酵的组合效应[J].草业科学,2014(2):313-320.
[15]夏科,王志博,郗伟斌,等.粗饲料组合对奶牛饲粮养分消化率、能量和氮的利用的影响[J].动物营养学报,2012,24(4):681-688.
[16]Blummel M,Bullerdieck P.The need to complement in vitro gas production measurements with residue determinations from in sacco degradabilities to improve the prediction of voluntary intake of hays[J].Animal Science,1997,64:71-75.
[17]唐赛涌.青贮玉米与稻秸之间组合效应的研究[D].黑龙江哈尔滨:东北农业大学,2009.
[18]Huhtanen Pekka.Associative effects of feeds in ruminants[J].Norwegian J.Agric.Sci.,1991(5):37-57.
[19]赵丽媛,彭永佳,王佳堃,等.外源纤维素酶制剂对玉米秸秆体外瘤胃发酵及甲烷产生的影响[C].中国河南郑州:中国畜牧兽医学会动物营养学分会第七届中国饲料营养学术研讨会,2014.
[20]王旭.利用GI技术对粗饲料进行科学搭配及绵羊日粮配方系统优化技术的研究[D].呼和浩特市:内蒙古农业大学,2003.
[21]彭点懿.不同品质粗饲料组合对体外发酵参数、夏季奶牛生产性能及血液生化指标的影响[D].雅安:四川农业大学,2010.
[22]黄聪,陈娟,于凯源,等.体外法评定豆秸与玉米秸、花生蔓和青贮玉米秸的组合效应[J].中国畜牧杂志,2016,52(11):19-23.