Effects of Addition Amount of Molasses on the Fermentation Quality and Microbial Diversity of Hybrid Broussonetia papyrifera L. Vent Silage

doi:10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2021-1104

Abstract

Abstract:

This experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of addition amount of molasses on nutritional value,fermentation quality and microbial diversity of hybrid Broussonetia papyrifera L. Vent silage. The four treatments were control group（without additive）,M5 group（5 g/kg molasses）,M10 group（10 g/kg molasses）and M20 group（20 g/kg molasses）. Each group had four replicates and ensiled for 60 d. As results,with an increase of molasses addition amount,the contents of dry matter and crude protein of hybrid B. papyrifera L.Vent silages linearly increased（P < 0.05）,while the contents of neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber linearly decreased（P < 0.05）. With an increase of molasses addition amount,the lactic acid content of hybrid B. papyrifera L.Vent silages linearly increased（P = 0.002）,while pH,butyric acid content and NH3-N/TN linearly decreased（P < 0.05）. At the phylum level,the dominant phylum in hybrid B. papyrifera L.Vent silages were Firmicutes,followed by Proteobacteria. At the genus level,the proportion of Lactobacillus significantly increased in the M10 and M20 group than the CK and M5 group（P = 0.005）,while the proportion of Weissella significantly decreased（P = 0.003）. The proportions of Clostridium_sensu_stricto_12 and Enterobacter in the M5,M10 and M20 groups were lower than those in the CK group（P < 0.05）. In conclusion,the addition of molasses improved the nutritional value and fermentation quality of hybrid B. papyrifera L. Vent silage,increased the proportion of Lactobacillus,and reduced the proportion of Clostridium_sensu_stricto_12 and Enterobacter. The hybrid B. papyrifera L. Vent silage added with 20 g/kg molasses had the best nutritional value and fermentation quality.

Key words: hybrid Broussonetia papyrifera L. Vent, silage, molasses, fermentation quality, microbial diversity

JIANG Fu-gui, CHENG Hai-jian, WEI Chen, ZHANG Zhao-kun, SU Wen-zheng, SHI Guang, SONG En-liang. Effects of Addition Amount of Molasses on the Fermentation Quality and Microbial Diversity of Hybrid Broussonetia papyrifera L. Vent Silage[J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2021, 37(9): 68-76.

Figures/Tables 7

References 35

[1]	陶莎, 张峭, 张晶. 2019年中国饲料市场回顾及2020年展望[J]. 农业展望, 2020, 16(4):12-17.
	Tao S, Zhang Q, Zhang J. China’s feed market situation in 2019 and outlook for 2020[J]. Agric Outlook, 2020, 16(4):12-17.
[2]	邳植, 沈世华. 构树作为新兴的蛋白饲料原料的研究[J]. 饲料工业, 2018, 39(11):23-28.
	Pi Z, Shen SH. Research on paper mulberry as a new type of protein feedstuff[J]. Feed Ind, 2018, 39(11):23-28.
[3]	屠焰, 刁其玉, 田莉, 等. 杂交构树营养成分瘤胃降解特点的研究[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2009, 45(11):38-41.
	Tu Y, Diao QY, Tian L, et al. Study on the rumen degradability of hybridized broussonetia papyrifera linn[J]. Chin J Animal Sci, 2009, 45(11):38-41.
[4]	黄媛, 代胜, 等. 不同添加剂对构树青贮饲料发酵品质及微生物多样性的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(3):1607-1617.
	Huang Y, Dai S, et al. Effects of different additives on fermentation quality and microbial diversity of paper mulberry silage[J]. Chin J Animal Nutr, 2021, 33(3):1607-1617.
[5]	Mordenti AL, Giaretta E, et al. A review regarding the use of molasses in animal nutrition[J]. Animals, 2021, 11(1):115. doi: 10.3390/ani11010115 URL
[6]	Kyum MK, Rahman SME, Islam MR, et al. A study on the growth performance of crossbred growing bull calves fed by supplementing molasses with straw based diets and conventional concentrates[J]. J Biol Sci, 2002, 3(1):26-31. doi: 10.3923/jbs.2003.26.31 URL
[7]	张娟利, 莫放, 姚刚, 等. 日粮添加甜菜糖蜜提高能量进食水平对新疆褐牛增重性能和瘤胃发酵的影响[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2021, 57(4):153-158.
	Zhang JL, Mo F, Yao G, et al. Effect of increasing dietary energy intake by beet molasses addition on growth performance and rumen fermentation in Xinjiang brown bulls[J]. Chin J Animal Sci, 2021, 57(4):153-158.
[8]	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.
	Huang QL, Zhou X, Wang J, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria, molasses and inorganic acid supplementations on fermentation quality and in vitro dry matter disappearance rate of Leymus chinensis silage[J]. Chin J Animal Nutr, 2021, 33(1):420-427.
[9]	付锦涛, 王学凯, 等. 添加乳酸菌和糖蜜对全株构树和稻草混合青贮的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2020, 29(4):121-128.
	Fu JT, Wang XK, et al. The effects of adding lactic acid bacteria and molasses on fermentation of Broussonetia papyrifera and rice straw mixed silage[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sin, 2020, 29(4):121-128.
[10]	穆麟, 李顺, 等. 添加糖蜜、乳酸菌制剂对籽粒苋与稻秸混合青贮品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2019, 27(2):482-487.
	Mu L, Li S, et al. Effect of adding molasses or lactic acid bacteria on quality of mixed silage of amaranth and rice straws[J]. Acta Agrestia Sin, 2019, 27(2):482-487.
[11]	AOAC. Official methods of analysis of AOAC[S]. 18th ed. Association of Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA, 2005.
[12]	van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition[J]. J Dairy Sci, 1991, 74(10):3583-3597. pmid: 1660498
[13]	DuBois M, Gilles KA, Hamilton JK, et al. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances[J]. Anal Chem, 1956, 28(3):350-356. doi: 10.1021/ac60111a017 URL
[14]	Wang J, Chen L, Yuan XJ, et al. Effects of molasses on the fermentation characteristics of mixed silage prepared with rice straw, local vegetable by-products and alfalfa in Southeast China[J]. J Integr Agric, 2017, 16(3):664-670. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(16)61473-9 URL
[15]	Weatherburn MW. Phenol-hypochlorite reaction for determination of ammonia[J]. Anal Chem, 1967, 39(8):971-974. doi: 10.1021/ac60252a045 URL
[16]	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.
	Wang YF, Jiang FG, Cheng HJ, et al. Effects of different silage additives on nutritional value, fermentation quality and rumen degradability of whole corn silage[J]. Chin J Animal Nutr, 2020, 32(6):2765-2774.
[17]	周昕, 黄秋连, 等. 添加乳酸菌剂和糖蜜对不同含水量食叶草青贮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(3):1594-1606.
	Zhou X, Huang QL, et al. Effects of adding lactic acid bacteria and molasses on fermentation quality and in vitro dry matter disappearance rate of Rumex hanus by. Silage with different moisture contents[J]. Chin J Animal Nutr, 2021, 33(3):1594-1606.
[18]	Dunière L, Sindou J, Chaucheyras-Durand F, et al. Silage processing and strategies to prevent persistence of undesirable microorganisms[J]. Animal Feed Sci Technol, 2013, 182(1/2/3/4):1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2013.04.006 URL
[19]	司丙文, 徐文财, 等. 不同添加剂对杂交构树青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2018, 30(11):4670-4675.
	Si BW, Xu WC, et al. Influence of different additives on fermentation quality of hybrid paper mulberry silage[J]. Chin J Animal Nutr, 2018, 30(11):4670-4675.
[20]	韩哲宇, 毕小兵, 史海涛, 等. 构树青贮饲料开发利用技术研究进展[J]. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(9):1-11.
	Han ZY, Bi XB, Shi HT, et al. Research advances in exploitation and utilization technology of broussonetia papyrifera silage[J]. Chin J Animal Nutr, 2021, 33(9):1-11.
[21]	曹力凡, 高正龙, 陈谭星, 等. 不同收割高度和留茬高度对杂交构树产量、营养成分及消化率的影响[J]. 饲料研究, 2021, 44(5):88-91.
	Cao LF, Gao ZL, Chen TX, et al. Effect of different harvesting height and stubble height on yield, nutrient composition and digestibility of hybrid Broussonetia papyrifera[J]. Feed Res, 2021, 44(5):88-91.
[22]	Jiang FG, Cheng HJ, Liu D, et al. Treatment of whole-plant corn silage with lactic acid bacteria and organic acid enhances quality by elevating acid content, reducing pH, and inhibiting undesirable microorganisms[J]. Front Microbiol, 2020, 11:593088. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.593088 URL
[23]	Wang YX, McAllister TA, et al. Effects of proanthocyanidins, dehulling and removal of pericarp on digestion of barley grain by ruminal micro-organisms[J]. J Sci Food Agric, 1999, 79(6):929-938. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0010 URL
[24]	Woolford MK, Pahlow G. The silage fermentation[M]// Microbiology of Fermented Foods. Boston, MA:Springer US, 1998:73-102.
[25]	施巧婷, 姜富贵, 等. 氯化铵对全株玉米青贮营养价值和发酵品质的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(4):2063-2072.
	Shi QT, Jiang FG, et al. Effects of ammonium chloride on nutritional value and fermentation quality of whole-plant corn silage[J]. Chin J Animal Nutr, 2021, 33(4):2063-2072.
[26]	Lindgren SE, Axelsson LT, McFeeters RF. Anaerobic l-lactate degradation by Lactobacillus plantarum[J]. FEMS Microbiol Lett, 1990, 66(1/2/3):209-213.
[27]	der Bedrosian MC, Nestor KE Jr, Kung L Jr. The effects of hybrid, maturity, and length of storage on the composition and nutritive value of corn silage[J]. J Dairy Sci, 2012, 95(9):5115-5126. doi: S0022-0302(12)00527-9 pmid: 22916917
[28]	李旭娇. 紫花苜蓿青贮饲料蛋白降解机制与调控研究[D]. 北京:中国农业大学, 2018.
	Li XJ. Research on mechanism and modification of protein degradation in alfalfa silage[D]. Beijing:China Agricultural University, 2018.
[29]	Kunji ERS, Mierau I, Hagting A, et al. The proteotytic systems of lactic acid bacteria[J]. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek, 1996, 70(2/3/4):187-221. doi: 10.1007/BF00395933 URL
[30]	Ni K, Wang F, et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteria and molasses additives on the microbial community and fermentation quality of soybean silage[J]. Bioresour Technol, 2017, 238:706-715. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2017.04.055 URL
[31]	Wang Y, Wang C, Zhou W, et al. Effects of wilting and Lactoba-cillus plantarum addition on the fermentation quality and microbial community of Moringa oleifera leaf silage[J]. Front Microbiol, 2018, 9:1817. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01817 pmid: 30127780
[32]	Guan H, Yan Y, Li X, et al. Microbial communities and natural fermentation of corn silages prepared with farm bunker-Silo in Southwest China[J]. Bioresour Technol, 2018, 265:282-290. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.06.018 URL
[33]	Xu D, Ding W, Ke W, et al. Modulation of metabolome and bacterial community in whole crop corn silage by inoculating homofermentative Lactobacillus plantarum and heterofermentative Lactobacillus buchneri[J]. Front Microbiol, 2018, 9:3299. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.03299 URL
[34]	Ren F, He R, Zhou X, et al. Dynamic changes in fermentation profiles and bacterial community composition during sugarcane top silage fermentation:a preliminary study[J]. Bioresour Technol, 2019, 285:121315. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.121315 URL
[35]	杨杨, 石超, 郭旭生. 高寒草甸魏斯氏乳酸菌的分离鉴定及理化特性研究[J]. 草业学报, 2014, 23(1):266-275.
	Yang Y, Shi C, Guo XS. Characterization and identification of Weissella species isolated from Kobresia littledalei growing in alpine meadows[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sin, 2014, 23(1):266-275.

项目Item	含量Content/%
干物质DM	28.73
粗蛋白CP	17.69
中性洗涤纤维NDF	44.80
酸性洗涤纤维ADF	23.07
酸性洗涤木质素ADL	8.70
粗灰分Ash	11.70
粗脂肪EE	6.49
水溶性碳水化合物WSC	1.27

项目Item	含量Content/%
干物质DM	28.73
粗蛋白CP	17.69
中性洗涤纤维NDF	44.80
酸性洗涤纤维ADF	23.07
酸性洗涤木质素ADL	8.70
粗灰分Ash	11.70
粗脂肪EE	6.49
水溶性碳水化合物WSC	1.27

项目Item	不同处理组Treatment				标准误SEM	P值P value
项目Item	CK	M5	M10	M20	标准误SEM	T	L	Q	C
干物质DM/%	24.41^b	26.83^a	28.02^a	28.32^a	0.466	0.001	<0.001	0.027	0.898
粗蛋白质CP/%	15.18^b	16.38^ab	16.98^ab	17.64^a	0.360	0.047	0.020	0.889	0.282
中性洗涤纤维NDF/%	37.56^a	35.42^a	32.13^b	31.39^b	0.718	<0.001	<0.001	0.034	0.237
酸性洗涤纤维ADF/%	20.88^a	20.48^a	19.41^a	17.41^b	0.403	<0.001	<0.001	0.490	0.658
酸性洗涤木质素ADL/%	5.97	6.40	5.35	4.64	0.294	0.161	0.149	0.612	0.321
粗灰分Ash/%	12.63^a	11.80^b	11.78^b	11.53^b	0.139	0.009	0.004	0.078	0.217
粗脂肪EE/%	6.96	7.98	7.67	7.58	0.367	0.828	0.733	0.510	0.592
水溶性碳水化合物WSC/%	0.54^c	0.53^c	0.79^b	1.08^a	0.064	<0.001	<0.001	0.303	0.123

项目Item	不同处理组Treatment				标准误SEM	P值P value
项目Item	CK	M5	M10	M20	标准误SEM	T	L	Q	C
干物质DM/%	24.41^b	26.83^a	28.02^a	28.32^a	0.466	0.001	<0.001	0.027	0.898
粗蛋白质CP/%	15.18^b	16.38^ab	16.98^ab	17.64^a	0.360	0.047	0.020	0.889	0.282
中性洗涤纤维NDF/%	37.56^a	35.42^a	32.13^b	31.39^b	0.718	<0.001	<0.001	0.034	0.237
酸性洗涤纤维ADF/%	20.88^a	20.48^a	19.41^a	17.41^b	0.403	<0.001	<0.001	0.490	0.658
酸性洗涤木质素ADL/%	5.97	6.40	5.35	4.64	0.294	0.161	0.149	0.612	0.321
粗灰分Ash/%	12.63^a	11.80^b	11.78^b	11.53^b	0.139	0.009	0.004	0.078	0.217
粗脂肪EE/%	6.96	7.98	7.67	7.58	0.367	0.828	0.733	0.510	0.592
水溶性碳水化合物WSC/%	0.54^c	0.53^c	0.79^b	1.08^a	0.064	<0.001	<0.001	0.303	0.123

项目Item	不同处理组Treatments				标准差 SEM	P值P value
项目Item	CK	M5	M10	M20	标准差 SEM	T	L	Q	C
pH	5.25^a	4.66^b	4.24^c	4.08^d	0.118	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.776
乳酸Lactic acid /（g·kg^-1）	21.64^b	46.98^ab	59.64^a	73.67^a	6.774	0.024	0.002	0.120	0.611
乙酸Acetic acid /（g·kg^-1）	24.96	26.04	24.09	22.72	0.649	0.342	0.131	0.595	0.401
丙酸Propionic acid /（g·kg^-1）	1.10^a	0.96^ab	0.52^b	0.44^b	0.104	0.043	0.010	0.380	0.358
丁酸Butyric acid /（g·kg^-1）	11.01^a	0.62^b	0.45^b	0.43^b	1.442	0.004	0.005	0.008	0.147
氨态氮/总氮NH₃-N/TN /%	13.40^a	7.02^b	5.18^b	2.53^c	1.092	<0.001	<0.001	0.003	0.150