Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T13:56:19.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of an inoculant/enzyme preparation as an additive for grass silage offered in combination with three levels of concentrate supplementation on performance of lactating dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

E. J. Smith ,
A. R. Henderson ,
J. D. Oldham ,
D. A. Whitaker ,
K. Aitchison ,
D. H. Anderson  and
J. M. Kelly
E. J. Smith
Affiliation:
Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG
A. R. Henderson
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College Edinburgh, School of Agriculture Building, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
J. D. Oldham
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College Edinburgh, School of Agriculture Building, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
D. A. Whitaker*
Affiliation:
Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG
K. Aitchison
Affiliation:
Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG
D. H. Anderson
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College Edinburgh, School of Agriculture Building, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
J. M. Kelly
Affiliation:
Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Easter Bush, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9RG
*
†For correspondence
Get access

Abstract

Three silages were prepared from the primary growth of a predominantly perennial ryegrass sward (dry matter (DM) 175 g/kg; crude protein 142 g/kg DM; water-soluble carbohydrates (WSC) 243 g/kg DM). Herbage was wilted for 24 h and then treated with either an inoculant/enzyme preparation (Lactobacillus plantarum, Streptococcus faecium and Pediococcus acidilactici), formic acid applied at 4·2 lit (Add F, BP Chemicals) or no additive. Time series analysis of laboratory silages revealed that different patterns of fermentation had been achieved: formic acid treatment resulted in high levels of residual WSC and low levels of lactic acid, indicative of an inhibited fermentation, whilst treatment with the inoculant/enzyme preparation resulted in high levels of lactic acid with a low level of residual sugars, as expected with an enhanced fermentation. Analysis of the material ‘as fed’ showed that losses in the WSC content of the formic acid-treated silage had occurred in the clamp. Secondary fermentation of lactic to acetic acid was apparent in the untreated silage, but not in the inoculant/enzyme-treated silage. Digestibility, as determined using Greyface wether lambs, was marginally higher for both additive treatments when compared with the untreated silage. An evaluation of the silages for milk production was carried out at three levels of concentrate supplementation using 18 Ayrshire × British Friesian cows in a replicated 3×3 Latin-square design experiment. Treatment with formic acid resulted in significantly higher DM intakes, but this was not reflected in milk energy output. Cows offered the inoculant/enzyme-treated silage partitioned energy away from milk production toward body tissue deposition (average milk yields 19·9, 19·9 and 15·2 kg/day, and weight gain 0·26, 0·38 and 0·81 kg/day for the untreated, formic acid and inoculant/enzyme-treated silages respectively). The reason for this is not clear, but it is postulated that microbial capture of degraded nitrogen may have been impaired with the inoculant/enzyme-treated silage, resulting in an imbalance in metabolizable protein: metabolizable energy.

Keywords

concentratesdairy cowssilage additives
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 56 , Issue 3 , June 1993 , pp. 301 - 310
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agricultural Research Council. 1980. Nutrient requirements of ruminant livestock. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Allred, K. R., Kennedy, W. K., Wittwer, L. S., Trimberger, G. W., Reid, J. T. and Loosli, J. K. 1955. Effects of preservative upon red clover and grass forage ensiled without wilting. Bulletin of Cornell University Agricultural Experimental Station no. 912.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1976. Condition scoring — dairy cows. East of Scotland College of Agriculture, Advisory Leaflet 100.Google Scholar
Barker, S. B. and Summerson, W. M. 1941. The colorimetric determination of lactic acid in biological materials. Journal of Biological Chemistry 138: 535–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. and Clapperton, J. L. 1965. Prediction of the amount of methane produced by ruminants. British Journal of Nutrition 19: 511–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chamberlain, D. G., Thomas, P. C. and Robertson, S. 1987. The effect of formic acid, bacterial inoculants and enzyme additives on feed intake and milk production in cows given silage of high or moderate digestibility with two levels of supplementary concentrates. Proceedings of the eighth silage conference, Institute for Grassland and Animal Production, pp. 31–32.Google Scholar
Dewar, W. A. and McDonald, P. 1961. Determination of dry matter in silage by distillation with toluene, Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 12: 790–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewar, W. A., McDonald, P. and Whittenbury, R. 1963. The hydrolysis of grass hemicelluloses during ensilage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 14: 411–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Done, D. 1986. Silage inoculants — a review of experimental work. Research and Development in Agriculture 3: 83–87.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J. 1989. An evaluation through lactating cattle of a bacterial inoculant as an additive for grass silage. Grass and Forage Science 44: 169–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, A. R. 1978. Determination of dry matter in silage. Edinburgh School of Agriculture annual report, p. 75.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. R., Anderson, D. H., Neilson, D. R. and Hunter, E. A. 1987. The effect of a commercial inoculant and Add-F applied at two levels on the chemical characteristics and utilization of ryegrass silages over two seasons. Proceedings of the eighth silage conference, Institute for Grassland and Animal Production, pp. 13–14.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. R., McDonald, P. and Anderson, D. 1982. The effect of a cellulose preparation derived from Trichoderma viride on the chemical changes during the ensilage of grass, lucerne and clover. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 33: 16–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, A. R., McGinn, R. and Kerr, W. D. 1987. The effect of a cellulase preparation applied with or without an inoculum of lactic acid bacteria on the chemical composition of lucerne ensiled in laboratory silos. Proceedings of the eighth silage conference, Institute for Grassland and Animal Production, pp. 29–30.Google Scholar
Hopkins, J. R. and Bass, R. V. 1987. Enzymes — their contribution as a silage additive. Proceedings of the eighth silage conference, Institute for Grassland and Animal Production, pp. 23–24.Google Scholar
Jackson, D. A. and Furniss, S. 1990. Restriction of silage fermentation by the application of high levels of mixed aliphatic carboxylic acids on the productive performance of lactating dairy cattle. Animal Production 50: 584–585 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Kelly, J. M. 1977. Changes in serum beta-hydroxy butyrate concentrations in dairy cows kept under commercial farm conditions. Veterinary Record 101: 499–502.Google Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1983. GENSTAT a general statistical program. Numerical Algorithms Group Limited.Google Scholar
Lindgren, S. E., Axelsson, L. T. and McFeeters, R. F. 1990. Degradation by Lactobacillus plantarum. FEMS Microbiology Letters 66: 209–214.Google Scholar
McDonald, P. and Henderson, A. R. 1964. Determination of water soluble carbohydrates in grass. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 15: 395–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayne, C. S. 1990. An evaluation of an inoculant of Lactobacillus plantarum as an additive for grass silage for dairy cattle. Animal Production 51: 1–13.Google Scholar
Mayne, C. S. and Steen, R. W. J. 1991. The effect of formic acid, sulphuric acid and a bacterial inoculant on silage fermentation and the feed intake and milk production of lactating dairy cows. Proceedings of the ninth silage conference, University of Newcastle, pp. 78–79.Google Scholar
Merry, R. J. and Braithwaite, G. D. 1987. The effect of enzymes and inoculants on the chemical and microbiological composition of grass and legume silages. Proceedings of the eighth silage conference, Institute for Grassland and Animal Production, pp. 27–28.Google Scholar
Morrison, I. M. 1979. Changes in the cell wall components of laboratory silages and the effects of various additives on these changes. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 93: 581–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Playne, M. J. and McDonald, P. 1966. The buffering constituents of herbage and of silage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 17: 264–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steen, R. W. J. 1990. Recent advances in the use of silage additives for dairy cattle. Proceedings of the winter meeting of the British Grassland Society, Peebles.Google Scholar
Steen, R. W. J., Unsworth, E. F., Gracey, H. I., Kennedy, S. J. and Anderson, R. 1989. Evaluation studies in the development of a commercial bacterial inoculant as an additive for grass silage. 3. Responses in growing cattle and interaction with protein supplementation. Grass and Forage Science 44: 381–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, J. D. 1984. Feeding and milk fat production. In Milk compositional quality and its importance in future markets (ed. Castle, M. E. and Gunn, R. G.), occasional publication, British Society of Animal Production, no. 9, pp. 43–52.Google Scholar
Thomas, C. 1987. Factors affecting substitution rates in dairy cows on silage based rations. In Recent advances in animal nutrition — 1987 (ed. , Haresign and , Cole), pp. 205–218. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, C., Dewhurst, R. J. and Laird, R. 1991. The efficacy of a biological silage additive for beef production. Proceedings of the European Grassland Federation conference, forage conservation towards 2000, Braunschzvcig, pp. 414–415.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. 1963. Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous feeds. II. A rapid method for the determination of fiber and lignin. Journal of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists 46: 829–835.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J. and Wine, R. H. 1967. Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous feeds. IV. Determination of plant cell wall constituents. Journal of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists 50: 50–55.Google Scholar
Whitelaw, F. G., Milne, J. S., Ørskov, E. R. and Smith, J. S.1986. The nitrogen and energy metabolism of lactating cows given abomasal infusions of casein. British Journal of Nutrition 55: 537–556.Google Scholar