Literature DB >> 35230425

Meta-analysis of the effects of chemical and microbial preservatives on hay spoilage during storage.

Marjorie A Killerby1, Diana C Reyes1, Robin White2, Juan J Romero1.   

Abstract

A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effects of chemical (50 articles) and microbial (21 articles) additives on hay preservation during storage. Multilevel linear mixed-effects models were fit with response variables calculated as predicted differences (Δ) between treated and untreated samples. Chemical preservatives were classified into five groups such as propionic acid (PropA), buffered organic acids (BOA), other organic acids (OOA), urea, and anhydrous ammonia (AA). Moderators of the models included preservative class (PC), forage type (FT; grass, legumes, and mixed hay), moisture concentration (MC), and application rate (AR). Dry matter (DM) loss during storage was affected by PC × FT (P = 0.045), PC × AR (P < 0.001), and PC × MC (P = 0.009), relative to the overall effect of preservatives (-0.37%). DM loss in PropA-treated hay was numerically reduced to a greater extent in grasses (-16.2), followed by mixed hay (-1.76), but it increased (+2.2%) in legume hay. Increasing AR of PropA resulted in decrease in DM loss (slope = -1.34). Application of BOA, OOA, PropA, and AA decreased visual relative moldiness by -22.1, -29.4, -45.5, and -12.2 percentage points, respectively (PC; P < 0.001). Sugars were higher in treated grass hay (+1.9) and lower in treated legume hay (-0.8% of DM) relative to their untreated counterparts (P < 0.001). The application of all preservatives resulted in higher crude protein (CP) than untreated hay, particularly urea (+7.92) and AA (+5.66% of DM), but PropA, OOA, and BOA also increased CP by 2.37, 2.04, and 0.73 percentage points, respectively. Additionally, preservative application overall resulted in higher in vitro DM digestibility (+1.9% of DM) relative to the untreated hay (x¯=58.3%), which increased with higher AR (slope = 1.64) and decreased with higher MC (slope = -0.27). Microbial inoculants had small effects on hay spoilage because the overall DM loss effect size was -0.21%. Relative to untreated (x¯=4.63% DM), grass hay preserved more sugars (+1.47) than legumes (+0.33) when an inoculant was applied. In conclusion, organic acid-based preservatives prevent spoilage of hay during storage, but their effectiveness is affected by FT, MC, and AR. Microbial inoculants had minor effects on preservation that were impaired by increased MC. Moreover, legume hay was less responsive to the effects of preservatives than grass hay.
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  hay; inoculant; organic acid; preservatives; propionic acid

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35230425      PMCID: PMC8903179          DOI: 10.1093/jas/skac023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  20 in total

1.  Buffering capacity of commercially available foods is influenced by composition and initial properties in the context of gastric digestion.

Authors:  Yamile A Mennah-Govela; Hongchang Cai; Joseph Chu; Kaela Kim; Mycalia-Keila Maborang; Weiyi Sun; Gail M Bornhorst
Journal:  Food Funct       Date:  2020-03-26       Impact factor: 5.396

2.  Study of benzoate, propionate, and sorbate salts as mould spoilage inhibitors on intermediate moisture bakery products of low pH (4.5-5.5).

Authors:  M E Guynot; A J Ramos; V Sanchis; S Marín
Journal:  Int J Food Microbiol       Date:  2004-12-29       Impact factor: 5.277

3.  Storage characteristics, nutritive value, energy content, and in vivo digestibility of moist, large rectangular bales of alfalfa-orchardgrass hay treated with a propionic acid-based preservative.

Authors:  W K Coblentz; K P Coffey; A N Young; M G Bertram
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 4.034

4.  Benzoic acid, a weak organic acid food preservative, exerts specific effects on intracellular membrane trafficking pathways in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  Reut Hazan; Alexandra Levine; Hagai Abeliovich
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.792

5.  Effects of a Bacterial Hay Preservative (Pediococcus pentosaceus) on Hay under Experimental Storage Conditions.

Authors:  C Duchaine; M C Lavoie; Y Cormier
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 6.  Review on Mycotoxin Issues in Ruminants: Occurrence in Forages, Effects of Mycotoxin Ingestion on Health Status and Animal Performance and Practical Strategies to Counteract Their Negative Effects.

Authors:  Antonio Gallo; Gianluca Giuberti; Jens C Frisvad; Terenzio Bertuzzi; Kristian F Nielsen
Journal:  Toxins (Basel)       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 4.546

7.  Effects of Incremental Urea Supplementation on Rumen Fermentation, Nutrient Digestion, Plasma Metabolites, and Growth Performance in Fattening Lambs.

Authors:  Yixuan Xu; Zhipeng Li; Luis E Moraes; Junshi Shen; Zhongtang Yu; Weiyun Zhu
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-09-04       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 8.  Biological Activity of Quaternary Ammonium Salts and Their Derivatives.

Authors:  Dobrawa Kwaśniewska; Ying-Lien Chen; Daria Wieczorek
Journal:  Pathogens       Date:  2020-06-10

9.  Functional characterization of PETIOLULE-LIKE PULVINUS (PLP) gene in abscission zone development in Medicago truncatula and its application to genetic improvement of alfalfa.

Authors:  Juan Du; Shaoyun Lu; Maofeng Chai; Chuanen Zhou; Liang Sun; Yuhong Tang; Jin Nakashima; Jaydeep Kolape; Zhaozhu Wen; Marjan Behzadirad; Tianxiu Zhong; Juan Sun; Yunwei Zhang; Zeng-Yu Wang
Journal:  Plant Biotechnol J       Date:  2020-09-14       Impact factor: 9.803

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.