| Literature DB >> 35633729 |
Daniel L Forwood1, Devin B Holman2, Alex V Chaves3, Sarah J Meale1.
Abstract
This study characterized the nutritive and microbial profiles and the fermentation characteristics of silage with the following compositions on a dry matter (DM) basis: (1) 100% sorghum, (2) 70% sorghum + 30% carrot or pumpkin, and (3) 40% sorghum + 60% carrot or pumpkin. The treatments were further divided based on the addition or no addition of a probiotic inoculant. After 70 days of ensiling, the silage was incubated for 48 h using the in vitro batch culture technique. Crude protein and non-fiber carbohydrates in the silage increased (P ≤ 0.01) by 5.7 percent point (pp) and 9.6 pp, respectively, with pumpkin at 60% DM. The V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene was sequenced to profile pre-ensiled and ensiled archeal and bacterial communities. Silages containing carrot or pumpkin strongly influenced the microbial structure (PERMANOVA: R 2 = 0.75; P < 0.001), despite the ensiled treatments being dominated by Lactobacillus spp., except for the control, which was dominated by Weissella and Pediococcus spp. (P < 0.01). Linear discriminant analysis indicated that carrot and pumpkin silages were responsible for the increased relative abundance of Lactobacillus and Acinetobacter spp. (log LDA score ≥ 2), respectively. After 48 h of incubation, carrot and pumpkin inclusion increased (P < 0.01) the in vitro DM digestibility by 22.5 and 31.3%, increased the total volatile fatty acids (VFAs) by 16 and 20.6% (P < 0.01), respectively, and showed a tendency (P = 0.07) to increase the gas production. Therefore, this study supports the use of carrot or pumpkin in sorghum silages to maximize feed digestibility and total VFA concentrations.Entities:
Keywords: 16S rRNA sequencing; in vitro rumen fermentation; microbial profiling; sorghum; unsalable vegetable silage
Year: 2022 PMID: 35633729 PMCID: PMC9133931 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.835913
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 6.064
Chemical composition of silages with carrot or pumpkin at 0, 30, or 60% DM, with (yes) or without (no) a probiotic inoculant.
| No probiotic | Carrot | Pumpkin | |||||||||
| 0 | 30 | 60 | 30 | 60 | SEM | Veg | Level | Veg × Level | Linear | Quadratic | |
| DM content, % | 27.3 | 21.8 | 14.4 | 20.1 | 16.7 | 1.32 | 0.87 | <0.01 | 0.38 | <0.01 | 0.69 |
| CP, % DM | 9.34 | 10.4 | 10.2 | 12.9b | 14.2a | 0.36 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.03 |
| NFC, % DM | 20.4 | 19.9 | 24.0 | 25.0 | 27.9 | 3.59 | 0.35 | 0.39 | 0.75 | 0.19 | 0.82 |
| EE, % DM | 8.27 | 8.09 | 5.55 | 4.87 | 5.26 | 0.68 | 0.08 | 0.01 | 0.10 | <0.01 | 0.57 |
| aNDF, % DM | 50.1 | 48.0 | 46.9 | 44.8 | 35.8 | 2.81 | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.19 | 0.02 | 0.79 |
| Ash, % DM | 11.9 | 13.7 | 13.4 | 12.4 | 15.8 | 0.83 | 0.60 | 0.06 | 0.18 | 0.02 | 0.77 |
|
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||||||||||
| DM content, % | 26.8 | 20.8 | 14.9 | 19.6 | 16.8 | 0.84 | 0.73 | <0.01 | 0.23 | <0.01 | 0.17 |
| CP, % DM | 10.3 | 10.8 | 10.8 | 11.8a | 12.6a | 0.26 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.03 | <0.01 | 0.29 |
| NFC, % DM | 20.1 | 24.2 | 28.6 | 27.5 | 29.2 | 1.61 | 0.37 | <0.01 | 0.60 | <0.01 | 0.37 |
| EE, % DM | 8.61 | 7.87 | 7.22 | 11.7 | 8.33 | 1.41 | 0.20 | 0.40 | 0.45 | 0.57 | 0.24 |
| aNDF, % DM | 49.2a | 45.1b | 40.6c | 38.1b | 38.0b | 0.94 | < 0.01 | <0.01 | 0.02 | <0.01 | 0.02 |
| Ash, % DM | 11.8 | 12.0 | 12.7 | 11.0 | 11.8 | 0.49 | 0.15 | 0.30 | 0.56 | 0.36 | 0.22 |
DM, dry matter; CP, crude protein; NFC, non-fiber carbohydrates; EE, ether extract; aNDF, neutral detergent fiber; SEM, standard error of the mean. Letters a–c indicate differences (P ≤ 0.03) between levels within vegetable (i.e., interaction Veg × Level was split by vegetable).
Fermentation parameters of sorghum combined with carrot or pumpkin at 0, 30, or 60% DM after 70 days of ensiling, split by with probiotic (yes) or without (no).
| No probiotic | Carrot | Pumpkin | |||||||||
| 0 | 30 | 60 | 30 | 60 | SEM | Veg | Level | Veg × Level | Linear | Quadratic | |
| Silage pH | 3.67c | 3.81b | 4.35a | 3.68 | 3.55 | 0.03 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.06 |
| Ethanol, % DM | 18.9a | 6.97b | 6.27b | 24.6a | 18.1b | 1.39 | <0.01 | 0.02 | <0.01 | 0.01 | 0.60 |
| Total VFA, mM | 3.90c | 13.6b | 20.7a | 5.42 | 6.79 | 1.22 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.54 |
|
| |||||||||||
| Lactic acid, mM | 15.0a | 13.5a | 2.82b | 16.1 | 16.8 | 0.73 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.01 |
| Succinic acid, mM | 0.31 | 0.50 | 0.67 | 0.31 | 0.35 | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.11 | 0.02 | 0.90 |
|
| |||||||||||
| Acetic acid, mM | 3.56c | 13.3b | 20.0a | 5.18 | 6.55 | 1.14 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.44 |
| Valeric acid, mM | 0.28 | 0.11 | 0.08 | 0.12 | 0.18 | 0.12 | 0.69 | 0.26 | 0.87 | 0.22 | 0.35 |
|
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||||||||||
| Silage pH | 3.68 | 3.95 | 3.83 | 3.60 | 3.59 | 0.10 | 0.04 | 0.60 | 0.22 | 0.82 | 0.37 |
| Ethanol, % DM | 21.7a | 7.30b | 7.20b | 8.05b | 17.4a | 1.41 | 0.02 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| Total VFA, mM | 6.28c | 18.3a | 10.1b | 10.3a | 9.14a | 0.94 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
|
| |||||||||||
| Lactic acid, mM | 14.8 | 9.41 | 14.45 | 14.8 | 16.7 | 2.71 | 0.23 | 0.42 | 0.53 | 0.79 | 0.21 |
| Succinic acid, mM | 0.35 | 0.54 | 0.56 | 0.26 | 0.32 | 0.09 | 0.06 | 0.61 | 0.35 | 0.34 | 0.96 |
|
| |||||||||||
| Acetic acid, mM | 5.51c | 17.8a | 9.97b | 9.89a | 9.00a | 0.92 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| Valeric acid, mM | 0.31 | 0.15 | 0.10 | 0.28 | 0.06 | 0.10 | 0.74 | 0.15 | 0.75 | 0.06 | 0.83 |
SEM, standard error of the mean; VFAs, volatile fatty acids; P-values for succinic and valeric acids for Veg × Level × Prob ≥ 0.75. Letters a–c indicate differences (P ≤ 0.05) between levels within vegetable (i.e., interaction Veg × Level was split by vegetable).
FIGURE 1A bar plot of (A) silage pH and (B) succinic acid concentration by vegetable (P ≤ 0.02) inclusion with probiotic use. Letters a,b indicate differences (P ≤ 0.04) between the probiotic treatments.
Pre-ensiled communities of sorghum ensiled with carrot or pumpkin at 30 or 60% DM, separated by probiotic.
| No probiotic | Carrot | Pumpkin | ||||||||||
| 0 | 30 | 60 | 0 | 30 | 60 | SEM | Veg | Level | Veg × Level | Linear | Quadratic | |
| No. OTUs | 27b | 69a | 78a | 27b | 15b | 63a | 5.93 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.01 | <0.01 | 0.21 |
| Inverse Simpson’s | 1.83b | 13.2a | 13.3a | 1.83b | 2.16b | 8.39a | 0.76 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.09 |
| Shannon | 1.22b | 3.18a | 3.24a | 1.22b | 1.10b | 2.82a | 0.11 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.88 |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| ||||||||||||
| No. OTUs | 41b | 63a | 71a | 38ab | 30b | 51a | 3.79 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.02 | <0.01 | 0.25 |
| Inverse Simpson’s | 1.77b | 11.9a | 13.6a | 1.83b | 5.99a | 7.27a | 0.98 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.03 | <0.01 | 0.01 |
| Shannon | 1.31b | 3.08a | 3.23a | 1.35c | 2.39b | 2.63a | 0.06 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
OTUs, operational taxonomic units; SEM, standard error of the mean. Letters a and b indicate differences (P ≤ 0.05) between levels within vegetable (i.e., interaction Veg × Level was split by vegetable). Interactions of Prob, Veg × Prob, Level × Prob, and Veg × Level × Prob were significant for the Shannon’s diversity index and number of OTUs (Level × Prob; P = 0.02).
Measures of alpha diversity for sorghum ensiled with carrot or pumpkin at 0, 30, or 60% DM for 70 days, separated by probiotic.
| No probiotic | Carrot | Pumpkin | |||||||||
| 0 | 30 | 60 | 30 | 60 | SEM | Veg | Level | Veg × Level | L | Q | |
| No. OTUs | 49 | 21 | 44 | 36 | 41 | 5.56 | 0.40 | 0.02 | 0.28 | 0.34 | 0.01 |
| Inverse Simpson’s | 5.42 | 2.68 | 6.85 | 3.64 | 6.61 | 0.34 | 0.42 | <0.01 | 0.25 | 0.01 | <0.01 |
| Shannon | 2.23a | 1.34b | 2.57a | 1.93 | 2.39 | 0.12 | 0.23 | <0.01 | 0.05 | 0.10 | <0.01 |
|
| |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||||||||||
| No. OTUs | 30 | 25 | 40 | 35 | 40 | 3.79 | 0.14 | 0.02 | 0.15 | 0.01 | 0.08 |
| Inverse Simpson’s | 5.02 | 3.25 | 6.05 | 3.05 | 4.55 | 0.83 | 0.40 | 0.07 | 0.58 | 0.75 | 0.03 |
| Shannon | 2.01 | 1.77 | 2.26 | 1.66 | 2.02 | 0.17 | 0.37 | 0.09 | 0.71 | 0.45 | 0.04 |
OTUs, operational taxonomical units; SEM, standard error of the mean; Letters a and b indicate differences between treatments (P ≤ 0.05) and between levels within the vegetable type (i.e., interaction Veg × Level was split by vegetable). P-values for Shannon’s and inverse Simpson’s diversity indices for interactions Veg × Prob, Level × Prob, and Veg × Level × Prob were ≥ 0.15.
FIGURE 2(A) Inverse Simpson’s diversity index and (B) the number of OTUs in ensiled samples that were influenced by vegetable level (P ≤ 0.01) when compared with probiotic use. When split by probiotic use, there was no effect of vegetable type (P ≥ 0.14; data not presented). Letters a–c indicate differences within probiotic treatments (P ≤ 0.05). Differentially abundant genera (C) in the microbiota of sorghum ensiled as a control, or with carrot or pumpkin supplementation for 70 days using the linear discriminant analysis effect size (LEfSe) method.
FIGURE 3(A) Non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis (NMDS) based on the Bray–Curtis distance measure of pre-ensiled and ensiled sorghum with carrot or pumpkin at 0, 30, or 60% DM. (B) Non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis (NMDS) based on the Bray–Curtis distance measure of sorghum ensiled with either carrot or pumpkin at 0, 30, or 60% DM, with or without a probiotic inoculant. In (B), vectors having a statistically significant association (P < 0.05) with the ordinations are included. Vector length is proportional to the degree of correlation between the fermentation parameters and the ordination.
In vitro fermentation, gas production, and CH4 parameters of sorghum ensiled with carrot or pumpkin at 0, 30, or 60% DM without (no) probiotics.
| No probiotic | Carrot | Pumpkin | |||||||||
| 0 | 30 | 60 | 30 | 60 | SEM | Veg | Level | Veg × Level | Linear | Quadratic | |
| Gas, mL | 29.6b | 29.3b | 34.4a | 33.8a | 33.4a | 0.75 | 0.06 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.71 |
| Gas, mL/g DM | 63.8b | 63.0b | 73.9a | 72.2a | 71.7a | 1.60 | 0.08 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.63 |
| Gas, mL/g DDM | 170.5 | 164.2 | 164.2 | 149.1 | 147.3 | 3.57 | 0.01 | <0.01 | 0.06 | <0.01 | 0.08 |
| CH4, % | 10.5 | 10.2 | 9.3 | 10.4 | 11.9 | 0.66 | 0.11 | 0.91 | 0.14 | 0.87 | 0.69 |
| CH4, mL g DM incubated | 6.7 | 6.5 | 6.8 | 7.5 | 8.6 | 0.46 | 0.03 | 0.11 | 0.16 | 0.04 | 0.61 |
| CH4, mL/g DDM | 17.9 | 16.9 | 15.2 | 15.4 | 17.6 | 1.08 | 0.76 | 0.22 | 0.28 | 0.18 | 0.34 |
| IVDMD, % | 37.4c | 38.5c | 45.1b | 48.7a | 48.7a | 0.73 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.07 |
| pH | 6.8 | 6.9 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 0.04 | 0.36 | 0.45 | 0.74 | 0.17 | 0.88 |
| Total VFA, mM | 81.4b | 81.7b | 97.6a | 99.5a | 99.5a | 2.82 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.01 | <0.01 | 0.76 |
|
| |||||||||||
| Acetic acid (A) | 63.4 | 62.9 | 61.9 | 60.7 | 60.8 | 1.08 | 0.08 | 0.03 | 0.33 | 0.01 | 0.33 |
| Propionic acid (P) | 22.3 | 22.8 | 25.1 | 25.3 | 25.0 | 1.20 | 0.26 | 0.02 | 0.22 | 0.01 | 0.61 |
| Butyric acid | 11.0 | 11.1 | 10.0 | 11.09 | 11.35 | 0.32 | 0.10 | 0.43 | 0.07 | 0.30 | 0.43 |
| Branched-chain VFA | 1.72a | 1.80a | 1.41b | 1.35b | 1.29b | 0.08 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.36 |
| Valeric acid | 1.12 | 1.15 | 1.13 | 1.10 | 1.16 | 0.05 | 0.86 | 0.87 | 0.71 | 0.62 | 0.89 |
| Caproic acid | 0.34 | 0.32 | 0.38 | 0.37 | 0.45 | 0.04 | 0.01 | <0.01 | 0.11 | <0.01 | 0.03 |
| Ratio A:P | 2.9 | 2.9 | 2.5 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 0.25 | 0.21 | 0.08 | 0.28 | 0.03 | 0.92 |
SEM, standard error of the mean; IVDMD, in vitro dry matter digestibility. P-values for Vegetable × Probiotic and Vegetable × Level × Probiotic ≥ 0.08.
In vitro volatile fatty acid composition of sorghum silages ensiled with carrot or pumpkin at 0, 30, or 60% DM, with (yes) probiotics.
| Yes probiotic | Carrot | Pumpkin | |||||||||
| 0 | 30 | 60 | 30 | 60 | SEM | Veg | Level | Veg × Level | Linear | Quadratic | |
| Gas, mL | 30.5 | 34.8 | 33.3 | 37.2 | 35.4 | 0.80 | 0.07 | <0.01 | 0.29 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| Gas, mL g DM | 65.9 | 74.4 | 72.2 | 79.8 | 75.9 | 1.78 | 0.08 | <0.01 | 0.29 | <0.01 | 0.01 |
| Gas, mL g DDM | 173.7 | 163.7 | 165.6 | 158.6 | 154.6 | 4.39 | 0.17 | 0.01 | 0.45 | 0.01 | 0.18 |
| CH4, % | 10.4 | 9.17 | 9.23 | 11.4 | 11.6 | 1.15 | 0.08 | 0.99 | 0.34 | 0.96 | 0.89 |
| CH4, mL g DM incubated | 6.84 | 6.82 | 6.91 | 9.15 | 8.96 | 1.00 | 0.05 | 0.27 | 0.28 | 0.19 | 0.43 |
| CH4, mL g DDM | 17.9 | 15.4 | 15.5 | 18.1 | 18.2 | 1.96 | 0.22 | 0.71 | 0.62 | 0.51 | 0.68 |
| IVDMD, % | 38.0c | 45.0b | 43.7b | 50.5a | 49.2a | 1.21 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.04 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| pH | 6.9 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 0.04 | 0.21 | 0.27 | 0.65 | 0.10 | 0.70 |
| Total VFA | 83.4 | 94.9 | 93.5 | 99.0 | 99.4 | 3.70 | 0.20 | <0.01 | 0.60 | <0.01 | 0.02 |
|
| |||||||||||
| Acetic acid (A) percentages of total VFAs | 63.1 | 59.6 | 61.3 | 59.1 | 58.7 | 0.95 | 0.09 | <0.01 | 0.18 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| Propionic acid (P) | 22.6 | 26.1 | 24.2 | 26.0 | 25.7 | 1.29 | 0.53 | 0.01 | 0.61 | 0.02 | 0.01 |
| Butyric acid | 11.3 | 11.2 | 11.8 | 12.0 | 12.7 | 0.64 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.74 | 0.13 | 0.73 |
| Branched-chain VFA | 1.68a | 1.50b | 1.31c | 1.30b | 1.30b | 0.07 | 0.06 | <0.01 | 0.05 | <0.01 | 0.02 |
| Valeric acid | 1.08 | 1.18 | 1.02 | 1.13 | 1.19 | 0.05 | 0.37 | 0.35 | 0.12 | 0.61 | 0.17 |
| Caproic acid | 0.34 | 0.38 | 0.34 | 0.46 | 0.42 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.13 | 0.14 | 0.01 |
| Ratio A:P | 2.8 | 2.5 | 2.7 | 2.3 | 2.3 | 0.25 | 0.17 | 0.06 | 0.52 | 0.07 | 0.09 |
SEM, standard error of the mean; VFAs, volatile fatty acids; BCVFAs, branch-chained volatile fatty acids (iso-butyrate and iso-valerate).