| Literature DB >> 31338085 |
Zhihao Dong1, Junfeng Li1, Lei Chen1, Siran Wang1, Tao Shao1.
Abstract
Freezing damages in forages represents a major economic loss to agriculture. This study was conducted to investigate the effects of freeze-thaw (FT) event on microbial community dynamics of red clover silage. Results showed that the FT-treated material displayed higher proportions of Weissella and aerobic bacteria, while lower Pantoea and Enterobacter compared with the control material. The FT event promoted the development of Lactobacillus in silage microflora, inducing more intense lactic fermentation after an initial short lag. The aerobic bacteria were suppressed immediately after the onset of ensiling. Microbiomes of the two silages tended to be almost similar after 2 days of ensiling. However, a small number of aerobic bacteria tended to revitalize in the FT silage with prolonged ensiling time, indicated by apparent abundances of Acinetobacter and Pseudomonas at the end of ensiling. The results obtained here suggest that the FT event could promote the development of Lactobacillus during ensiling and the control of aerobe revitalization need to be concerned with silages made from the freeze-damaged forages.Entities:
Keywords: fermentation quality; freeze–thaw event; microbial community; next-generation sequencing; red clover
Year: 2019 PMID: 31338085 PMCID: PMC6629895 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01559
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
The characteristics of red clover forages upon ensiling.
| DM (% FM) | 21.0 | 20.7 | 0.22 | 0.536 |
| WSC (g/kg DM) | 109 | 97.1 | 6.62 | 0.884 |
| TN (g/kg DM) | 29.3 | 28.7 | 0.42 | 0.471 |
| NPN (g/kg TN) | 145 | 246 | 5.71 | 0.012 |
| FAA-N (g/kg TN) | 65.2 | 102 | 4.69 | 0.009 |
| TTD (%) | 14.4 | 70.0 | 3.47 | 0.002 |
| LAB (lg cfu/g FM) | 6.21 | 7.12 | 0.12 | 0.017 |
| Yeast (lg cfu/g FM) | 4.33 | 4.87 | 0.07 | 0.024 |
| Aerobic bacteria (lg cfu/g FM) | 6.16 | 7.68 | 0.26 | 0.002 |
Fermentation parameters and microbial counts during ensiling.
| CK silage | 1 | 4.74e | 20.3bc | 92.9c | 39.4ab | 17.9b | 11.2a | 1.57b | 30.2b | 6.21a | 4.20cd | 4.12d |
| 2 | 4.61d | 18.8a | 63.0b | 54.4e | 34.5c | 12.4ab | 2.55c | 40.0d | 8.12cd | 4.10cd | 4.02d | |
| 4 | 4.46c | 19.8abc | 36.8ab | 52.8cde | 50.5d | 16.1bcde | 3.14d | 38.0cd | 7.95cd | 3.71b | 3.48b | |
| 8 | 4.39c | 19.2ab | 18.2a | 57.9ef | 55.9e | 17.9de | 3.10d | 37.2cd | 8.30cd | 3.54ab | 3.14a | |
| 30 | 4.39c | 20.3bc | 20.7a | 64.8f | 67.5f | 23.2f | 2.91d | 35.0c | 7.42b | 3.44a | 3.10a | |
| FT silage | 1 | 4.84f | 20.8c | 57.5b | 36.9a | 4.88a | 13.9abc | 0.35a | 25.4a | 7.22b | 4.45e | 3.98cd |
| 2 | 4.44c | 19.4ab | 58.8b | 39.0ab | 44.4d | 15.2bcd | 2.93d | 27.9ab | 8.81e | 4.41de | 3.87c | |
| 4 | 4.29ab | 19.0ab | 53.1b | 45.9bcd | 60ef | 17.1cde | 3.51e | 30.2b | 8.04cd | 3.92c | 3.40b | |
| 8 | 4.31b | 19.5abc | 38.3ab | 45.5bc | 67.9f | 18.9e | 3.59e | 29.2ab | 8.45d | 3.41a | 3.50bc | |
| 30 | 4.22a | 18.7a | 21.6a | 53.6de | 78.2g | 22.3f | 3.53e | 26.1ab | 7.48b | 3.54ab | 3.67c | |
| SEM | 0.008 | 0.130 | 3.338 | 0.799 | 1.046 | 0.351 | 0.027 | 0.403 | 0. 210 | 0.173 | 0.073 | |
| Treatment (T) | <0.001 | 0.450 | 0.595 | <0.001 | 0.011 | 0.135 | 0.026 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |
| Day (D) | <0.001 | 0.019 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |
| T × D | <0.001 | 0.073 | 0.454 | 0.136 | 0.005 | 0.583 | <0.001 | 0.151 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |
FIGURE 1Rarefaction curves for all samples. CK, untreated control; FT, freeze-thawed samples. Arabic numbers following the treatment abbreviation indicate the ensiling day.
Alpha diversity of bacterial diversity during ensiling.
| CK silage | 0 | 56091 | 153 | 1.52 | 142 | 1.00 |
| 1 | 48263 | 63.7 | 2.03 | 115 | 1.00 | |
| 2 | 58790 | 90.1 | 2.34 | 119 | 1.00 | |
| 4 | 56091 | 111 | 2.19 | 97.6 | 1.00 | |
| 8 | 43168 | 95.3 | 2.43 | 96.6 | 1.00 | |
| 30 | 41347 | 125 | 2.39 | 165 | 1.00 | |
| FT silage | 0 | 58790 | 302 | 2.89 | 257 | 1.00 |
| 1 | 51562 | 69.9 | 1.90 | 76.6 | 1.00 | |
| 2 | 44872 | 102 | 2.36 | 117 | 1.00 | |
| 4 | 58790 | 81.9 | 2.26 | 84.4 | 1.00 | |
| 8 | 41347 | 87.3 | 2.45 | 89.5 | 1.00 | |
| 30 | 48263 | 129 | 2.52 | 148 | 1.00 |
FIGURE 2The dynamic variance of bacterial community at genus level shown by NMDS analysis. CK, untreated control; FT, freeze-thawed samples. Arabic numbers following the treatment abbreviation indicate the ensiling day.
FIGURE 3Dynamics of microbial community structure during ensiling at phylum level. CK, untreated control; FT, freeze-thawed samples. Arabic numbers following the treatment abbreviation indicate the ensiling day.
FIGURE 4Dynamics of microbial community structure during ensiling at genus level. CK, untreated control; FT, freeze-thawed samples. Arabic numbers following the treatment abbreviation indicate the ensiling day.