| Literature DB >> 35456837 |
Qiming Cheng1,2, Liangyin Chen1,2, Yulian Chen1,2, Ping Li1,2,3, Chao Chen1,2.
Abstract
Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) have been proposed for the control of undesirable fermentation and, subsequently, aerobic deterioration due to their ability to produce antimicrobial metabolites in silage mass. To investigate the effect of specific LAB on the silage fermentation characteristics and bacterial community composition of oat in cold regions, silages were treated without (control) or with three LAB strains (LB, Lentilactobacillus buchneri; nLP, low temperature tolerant Lactiplantibacillus plantarum; pLP, phenyllactic acid-producing Lactiplantibacillus plantarum), and then stored at ambient temperature (-2.63 ± 5.47-14.29 ± 5.48 °C) for 30, 60, and 90 days. Compared with control, inoculation of LAB decreased the final pH value, butyric acid content, ammonia-N of total N and dry matter loss of silage. Treatments with nLP and pLP increased (p < 0.05) lactic acid content, whereas LB increased (p < 0.05) acetic acid content of silage. Lactiplantibacillus and Leuconostoc dominated in the silages with relative abundance of 68.29-96.63%. A prolonged storage period enhanced the growth of Leuconostoc in pLP-treated silage. In addition, pLP increased (p < 0.05) the aerobic stability of silage as compared with nLP. In conclusion, inoculation of LAB improved silage fermentation and/or delayed aerobic deterioration by shifting bacterial community composition during ensiling. Phenyllactic acid-producing Lactiplantibacillusplantarum as an inoculant exhibited potential for high quality silage production.Entities:
Keywords: bacterial community; fermentation; lactic acid bacteria; phenyllactic acid; silage
Year: 2022 PMID: 35456837 PMCID: PMC9026496 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms10040787
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
The chemical and microbial compositions of fresh forage and silages after 30, 60, and 90 days of ensiling.
| Items | Fresh Forage | Additives | Storage Period | SEM | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 d | 60 d | 90 d | A | S | A × S | ||||
| DM, % | 24.55 | CK | 25.46 | 26.59 | 25.72 | 0.72 | 0.197 | 0.241 | 0.508 |
| LB | 26.12 | 27.75 | 25.27 | ||||||
| nLP | 25.29 | 26.18 | 26.44 | ||||||
| pLP | 26.38 | 26.00 | 26.82 | ||||||
| DM loss, % | _ | CK | 3.17Ac | 3.48Ab | 3.86Aa | 0.26 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| LB | 2.65Bb | 2.82Bb | 3.41Ba | ||||||
| nLP | 1.81Db | 1.96Dab | 2.08Da | ||||||
| pLP | 2.21Cb | 2.34Cab | 2.58Ca | ||||||
| WSC, %DM | 8.91 | CK | 2.18Ba | 1.98Ba | 0.17Bb | 1.02 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| LB | 2.15Ba | 1.87Bb | 0.20Bc | ||||||
| nLP | 3.19Aa | 2.28Ab | 2.16Ab | ||||||
| pLP | 3.21Aa | 2.19Ab | 0.32Bc | ||||||
| LAB, log cfu/g of FM | 2.81 | CK | 5.55D | 5.43C | 5.58C | 0.54 | <0.001 | 0.137 | <0.001 |
| LB | 8.12Bb | 9.42Aa | 9.66Aa | ||||||
| nLP | 9.45A | 9.88A | 9.52A | ||||||
| pLP | 6.89C | 7.45B | 7.16B | ||||||
| Yeasts, log cfu/g of FM | 4.17 | CK | 3.1 | 3.36 | 3.48 | — | — | — | — |
| LB | <1.0 | <1.0 | <1.0 | ||||||
| nLP | <1.0 | <1.0 | <1.0 | ||||||
| pLP | 2.22 | 2.14 | 2.1 | ||||||
A, additive; A × S, interaction between additive and storage period; CK, control without additives; DM, dry matter; FM, fresh matter; LAB, lactic acid bacteria; LB, Lentilactobacillus buchneri; nLP, low temperature tolerant Lactiplantibacillus plantarum; pLP, phenyllactic acid-producing Lactiplantibacillus plantarum; S, storage period; SEM, standard error of mean; WSC, water soluble carbohydrates. Values with different letters in the same column are significantly different (p < 0.05).
The fermentation quality and aerobic stability of silages after 30, 60, and 90 days of ensiling.
| Items | Additives | Storage Period | SEM | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 d | 60 d | 90 d | A | S | A × S | |||
| pH | CK | 4.55 | 4.45 | 4.51 | 0.06 | <0.001 | 0.056 | 0.115 |
| LB | 4.41 | 4.34 | 4.38 | |||||
| nLP | 4.18 | 4.19 | 4.14 | |||||
| pLP | 4.42 | 4.41 | 4.44 | |||||
| Phenyllactic acid, %DM | CK | <0.1 | nd | nd | — | — | — | — |
| LB | nd | nd | nd | |||||
| nLP | nd | nd | nd | |||||
| pLP | 16.8 | 14.4 | 15.1 | |||||
| Lactic acid, % DM | CK | 2.02D | 1.88C | 1.89C | 0.39 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| LB | 2.26C | 2.22B | 2.23B | |||||
| nLP | 3.02A | 3.19A | 3.06A | |||||
| pLP | 2.86Ba | 2.49Bb | 2.43Bb | |||||
| Acetic acid, % DM | CK | 0.24 | 0.28 | 0.32 | 0.14 | 0.008 | 0.195 | 0.466 |
| LB | 0.71 | 0.79 | 0.8 | |||||
| nLP | 0.17 | 0.18 | 0.16 | |||||
| pLP | 0.36 | 0.38 | 0.37 | |||||
| Propionic acid, % DM | CK | nd | nd | 0.14 | 0.01 | — | — | — |
| LB | 0.25 | 0.2 | 0.22 | |||||
| nLP | nd | nd | 0.05 | |||||
| pLP | nd | 0.15 | 0.17 | |||||
| Butyric acid, % DM | CK | 0.16 | 0.14 | 0.13 | 0.01 | <0.001 | 0.216 | 0.179 |
| LB | 0.1 | 0.08 | 0.09 | |||||
| nLP | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.09 | |||||
| pLP | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.05 | |||||
| Ammonia-N, %TN | CK | 14.30Ab | 18.72Aa | 18.50Aa | 1.04 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| LB | 12.61Bc | 14.27Bb | 15.07Ba | |||||
| nLP | 10.25Cb | 11.48Cab | 12.13Ca | |||||
| pLP | 12.31Bc | 13.42Bb | 14.97Ba | |||||
| Aerobic stability, h | CK | 86.00Db | 84.00Db | 98.00Ca | 8.41 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| LB | 171.00A | 179.00A | 184.00A | |||||
| nLP | 96.00C | 100.00C | 98.00C | |||||
| pLP | 118.00Bb | 122.00Bb | 142.00Ba | |||||
A, additive; A × S, interaction between additive and storage period; CK, control without additives; DM, dry matter; LB, Lentilactobacillus buchneri; nd, no detected; nLP, low temperature tolerant Lactiplantibacillus plantarum; pLP, phenyllactic acid-producing Lactiplantibacillus plantarum; S, storage period; SEM, standard error of mean; TN, total nitrogen. Values with different letters in the same column are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 1The bacterial community index of fresh forage (FF) and control without additives (CK) or with functional LAB (LB, Lentilactobacillus buchneri; nLP, low temperature tolerant Lactiplantibacillus plantarum; pLP, phenyllactic acid-producing Lactiplantibacillus plantarum; each application rate of 106 cfu/g FM), and ensiled for 30 d, 60 d, and 90 d. Bars with different letters (a–e) differ (p < 0.05). OTU, operational taxonomic unit; SEM, standard error of means.
Figure 2The relative abundance of top 10 bacterial genera of fresh forage (FF) and control without additives (CK) or with functional LAB (LB, Lentilactobacillus buchneri; nLP, low temperature tolerant Lactiplantibacillus plantarum; pLP, phenyllactic acid-producing Lactiplantibacillus plantarum; each application rate of 106 cfu/g FM), and ensiled for 30 d, 60 d and 90 d.