| Literature DB >> 34957445 |
Guoqiang Zhao1, Hao Wu2, Li Li1, Jiajun He1, Zhichao Hu1, Xinjian Yang1, Xiangxue Xie1.
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of applying cellulase and starch on the fermentation characteristics and microbial communities of Napier grass silage after ensiling for 30 d. Three groups were studied: No additives (control); added cellulase (Group 1); and added cellulase and starch (Group 2). The results showed that the addition of cellulase and starch decreased the crude protein (CP), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF) and pH significantly (p < 0.05) and increased water-soluble carbohydrate (WSC) content (p < 0.05). The addition of additives in two treated groups exerted a positive effect on the lactic acid (LA) content, lactic acid bacteria (LAB) population, and lactic acid / acetic acid (LA/AA) ratio, even the changes were not significant (p > 0.05). Calculation of Flieg's scores indicated that cellulase application increased silage quality to some extent, while the application of cellulase and starch together significantly improved fermentation (p < 0.05). Compared with the control, both additive groups showed increased microbial diversity after ensiling with an abundance of favorable bacteria including Firmicutes and Weissella, and the bacteria including Proteobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Acinetobacter increased as well. For alpha diversity analysis, the combined application of cellulase and starch in Group 2 gave significant increases in all indices (p < 0.05). The study demonstrated that the application of cellulase and starch can increase the quality of Napier grass preserved as silage. © Copyright 2021 Korean Society of Animal Science and Technology.Entities:
Keywords: Cellulase; Microbial community; Napier grass; Silage quality; Starch
Year: 2021 PMID: 34957445 PMCID: PMC8672258 DOI: 10.5187/jast.2021.e107
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anim Sci Technol ISSN: 2055-0391
Chemical composition of Napier grass before and after ensiling
| Item | DM | CP | ADF | NDF | WSC | Ash | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| g / kg | g / kg DM | ||||||
| Before ensiling | |||||||
| Raw material | 244.10 | 142.26 | 348.32 | 689.65 | 70.11 | 115.68 | |
| After ensiling | |||||||
| Control[ | 193.29 | 125.84[ | 364.06[ | 625.46[ | 26.72[ | 124.85 | |
| Group 1 | 202.81 | 125.37[ | 345.60[ | 585.25[ | 36.86[ | 123.33 | |
| Group2 | 203.38 | 117.54[ | 324.72[ | 551.37[ | 55.07[ | 122.94 | |
| SEM | 3.170 | 1.623 | 6.611 | 12.351 | 4.502 | 0.740 | |
| | 0.395 | 0.030 | 0.018 | 0.015 | 0.003 | 0.602 | |
Control, no additives; Group 1, added cellulase; Group 2, added cellulase and starch.
Means within a column with different superscripts differ (p < 0.05).
DM, dry matter; CP, crude protein; ADF, acid detergent fiber; NDF, neutral detergent fiber; WSC, water-soluble carbohydrate.
Effects of applying additives on fermentation characteristics of Napier grass silage
| Group | pH | NH3-N/TN | LA | AA | PA | BA | LA/AA | Flieg’s
score[ | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| g /kg DM | % | ||||||||
| Control[ | 4.72[ | 258.47 | 15.19 | 0.76 | 0.28 | ND | 20.11 | 57.01[ | Average |
| Group 1 | 4.49[ | 272.55 | 19.49 | 0.84 | ND | ND | 23.22 | 64.19[ | Good |
| Group 2 | 4.32[ | 271.26 | 23.34 | 1.01 | ND | ND | 27.67 | 73.02[ | Good |
| SEM | 0.062 | 8.133 | 1.610 | 0.063 | - | - | 1.959 | 2.580 | - |
| 0.002 | 0.826 | 0.126 | 0.287 | - | - | 0.383 | 0.012 | - |
Flieg’ s scores (0–100) were ranked into five grades: Poor (0–20), Fair (21–40), Average (41–60), Good (61–80), and Excellent (81–100).
Control, no additives; Group 1, added cellulase; Group 2, added cellulase and starch.
Means within a column with different superscripts differ (p < 0.05).
NH3-N, ammonium nitrogen; TN, total nitrogen; LA, lactic acid; AA, acetic acid; PA, propionic acid; BA, butyric acid; DM, dry matter; ND, not detected; -, default.
Effects of applying additives on microbial population of Napier grass silage
| Group | LAB |
| Mold | Yeast |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Log CFU/g of FM | ||||
| Control[ | 7.96 | ND | ND | ND |
| Group 1 | 8.15 | ND | ND | ND |
| Group 2 | 8.22 | ND | ND | ND |
| SEM | 0.087 | - | - | - |
| 0.573 | - | - | - | |
Control, no additives; Group 1, added cellulase; Group 2, added cellulase and starch.
LAB, lactic acid bacteria; E.coli, Escherichia coli.; CFU, colony forming units; FM, fresh matte; ND, not detected.
Fig. 1.Venn analysis of operational taxonomic units (OTUs) for Napier grass silage.
Control, no additives; Group 1, added cellulase; Group 2, added cellulase and starch.
OTUs number and Alpha diversity indices of microbial community for Napier grass silage
| Group | OTUs number | Observed species | Shannon | Simpson | Chao1 | ACE | Goods-coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control[ | 68 | 195[ | 3.074[ | 0.755[ | 212[ | 213[ | 0.999 |
| Group1 | 67 | 173[ | 3.627[ | 0.868[ | 199[ | 202[ | 0.999 |
| Group2 | 75 | 243[ | 3.585[ | 0.843[ | 269[ | 268[ | 0.999 |
| SEM | 2.603 | 11.425 | 0.102 | 0.020 | 11.284 | 10.971 | - |
| 0.399 | 0.004 | 0.014 | 0.017 | 0.001 | 0.002 | - |
Control, no additives; Group 1, added cellulase; Group 2, added cellulase and starch.
Means within a column with different superscripts differ (p < 0.05).
OTUs, operational taxonomic units.
Fig. 2.Relative abundance of microbial community on phylum (a) and genus (b) level for Napier grass silage.
Control, no additives; Group 1, added cellulase; Group 2, added cellulase and starch.
Fig. 3.Principal component analysis (PCA) of microbial community for Napier grass silage.
Control, no additives; Group 1, added cellulase; Group 2, added cellulase and starch.