|国家科技期刊平台
首页|期刊导航|畜牧与饲料科学|不同填装密度下添加乳酸菌和糖对小麦秸秆黄贮饲料发酵品质及微生物群落的影响

不同填装密度下添加乳酸菌和糖对小麦秸秆黄贮饲料发酵品质及微生物群落的影响OACSTPCD

Effects of Adding Lactic Acid Bacteria and Sugar on Fermentation Quality and Microbial Community of Wheat Straw Yellow Storage at Different Compaction Densities

中文摘要英文摘要

[目的]探究在不同填装密度下添加乳酸菌和糖对小麦秸秆黄贮饲料发酵损失率、发酵品质和微生物群落结构的影响.[方法]将小麦秸秆粉碎,调节水分含量至 60%,混合均匀后随机分成 2 等份.取一份加入由活菌数为 1×105 CFU/g的植物乳杆菌(添加量为 5 g/t)和白砂糖(添加量为 10 kg/t)组成的混合添加剂并均匀喷洒 3%的无菌水,按 450、500、550 kg/m3 的密度进行填装调制黄贮饲料(添加剂处理组);另一份均匀喷洒 3%的无菌水,按 450、500、550 kg/m3 的密度进行填装调制黄贮饲料(对照组).分别于发酵 1、3、6、15、35、200 d测定 2 组不同填装密度黄贮饲料的发酵损失率;在发酵 200 d开盖取样,测定发酵品质、微生物数量和微生物多样性.[结果]从黄贮 3d开始至 200 d,2 组黄贮饲料的发酵损失率均显著(P<0.05)增加;发酵 35d和 200 d,添加剂处理组的发酵损失率显著(P<0.05)低于对照组.添加剂处理组的pH值显著(P<0.05)低于对照组,乳酸含量显著(P<0.05)高于对照组,氨态氮含量显著(P<0.05)低于对照组,酸碱缓冲能力值显著(P<0.05)高于对照组.添加剂处理组的乳酸菌数量和酵母菌数量显著(P<0.05)低于对照组.2 组黄贮饲料中的主要菌属均为乳植杆菌属(Lactiplantibacillus)和迟缓乳杆菌属(Lentilactobacillus),相对丰度分别为 22.12%~49.18%和 1.45%~49.91%,这两个属在黄贮饲料中的总相对丰度大于 34.25%.在 450 kg/m3 填装密度下,添加剂处理组的明串珠菌属(Leuconostoc)和肠杆菌属(Enterobacter)相对丰度显著(P<0.05)低于对照组;在 500 kg/m3 填装密度下,添加剂处理组的迟缓乳杆菌属、明串珠菌属相对丰度显著(P<0.05)低于对照组,而肠杆菌属、泛菌属(Pantoea)、罗尔斯通氏菌属(Ralstonia)和魏斯氏菌属(Weissella)相对丰度显著(P<0.05)高于对照组;在550 kg/m3 填装密度下,添加剂处理组的迟缓乳杆菌属、肠杆菌属和明串珠菌属相对丰度显著(P<0.05)低于对照组,而芽孢杆菌属(Bacillus)和类芽孢杆菌属(Paenibacillus)相对丰度显著(P<0.05)高于对照组.迟缓乳杆菌属的相对丰度与乳酸含量、乳酸/乙酸和酸碱缓冲能力值呈负相关(P>0.05),与乙酸含量呈正相关(P>0.05),与pH值呈显著(P<0.05)正相关,与氨态氮含量呈显著(P<0.01)正相关;肠球菌属(Enterococcus)、乳球菌属(Lactococcus)的相对丰度与乳酸含量呈显著(P<0.05)负相关,与乳酸/乙酸和酸碱缓冲能力值呈显著(P<0.01)负相关,与pH值呈显著(P<0.01)正相关.乳酸菌和酵母菌数量与pH值、氨态氮含量呈显著(P<0.01)正相关,与乳酸/乙酸呈显著(P<0.01)负相关.[结论]提高填装密度、使用添加剂可降低小麦秸秆黄贮饲料的发酵损失率,改善发酵品质.

[Objective]This study was conducted to assess the effects of adding lactic acid bacteria and sugars on fermentation weight loss,fermentation quality and microbial community structure of wheat straw yellow storage at different compaction densities.[Method]Wheat straw was crushed into proper length and the initial moisture content was adjusted to 60%.After well mixing,it was randomly divide into two equal parts.One part was supplemented with the additives composed of a commercially available microbial agent containing 1×105 CFU/g of Lactobacillus plantarum(5 g/t)and white sugar(10 kg/t),evenly sprayed with 3%sterile water,and then compacted to prepare yellow storage at the densities of 450,500 and 550 kg/m3(additive treatment group),respectively.The other part was evenly sprayed with 3%sterile water,and then compacted to prepare yellow storage at the densities of 450,500 and 550 kg/m3(control group),respectively.Fermentation weight loss of the yellow storage of the two groups with different compaction densities were measured after fermentation for 1,3,6,15,35 and 200 d,respectively.At 200 d of fermentation,the yellow storage samples were taken to assess the fermentation quality,microbial quantity and microbial diversity.[Result]From 3 d to 200 d of fermentation,the fermentation weight loss of both groups increased significantly(P<0.05).At 35 d and 200 d of fermentation,the fermentation weight loss of the additive treatment group was significantly(P<0.05)lower than that of the control group.Compared with the control group,the additive treatment group had significantly(P<0.05)lower pH value,significantly(P<0.05)higher lactic acid content,significantly(P<0.05)reduced ammoniacal nitrogen content,and significantly(P<0.05)elevated acid-base buffering capacity.The number of lactic acid bacteria and yeasts of the additive treatment group was significantly(P<0.05)lower than that of the control group.Lactiplantibacillus and Lentilactobacillus were found as the dominant bacterial genera in both groups,with relative abundance of 22.12%-49.18%and 1.45%-49.91%,respectively,and their total relative abundance exceeded 34.25%.At the compaction density of 450 kg/m3,the relative abundance of Leuconostoc and Enterobacter of the additive treatment group was significantly(P<0.05)lower than that of the control group.At the compaction density of 500 kg/m3,significantly(P<0.05)lower relative abundance of Lentilactobacillus and Leuconostoc as well as significantly(P<0.05)higher relative abundance of Enterobacter,Pantoea,Ralstonia and Weissella were observed in the additive treatment group compared with the control group.At the compaction density of 550 kg/m3,the additive treatment group had significantly(P<0.05)decreased relative abundance of Lentilactobacillus,Enterobacter and Leuconostoc as well as significantly(P<0.05)increased relative abundance of Bacillus and Paenibacillus than the control group.The relative abundance of Lentilactobacillus was negatively correlated with lactic acid content,the ratio of lactic acid to acetic acid,and acid-base buffering capacity(P>0.05),positively correlated with acetic acid content(P>0.05),significantly(P<0.05)positively correlated with pH value,and significantly(P<0.01)positively correlated with ammoniacal nitrogen content.The relative abundance of Enterococcus and Lactococcus was significantly(P<0.05)negatively correlated with lactic acid content,significantly(P<0.01)negatively correlated with the ratio of lactic acid to acetic acid as well as acid-base buffering capacity,and significantly(P<0.01)positively correlated with pH value.The number of lactic acid bacteria and yeasts was significantly(P<0.01)positively correlated with pH value and ammoniacal nitrogen content,and significantly(P<0.01)negatively correlated with the ratio of lactic acid to acetic acid.[Conclusion]Increasing compaction density and utilizing microbial additive can reduce the fermentation weight loss and ameliorate the fermentation quality of wheat straw yellow storage.

李东洋;乌尼尔;娜娜;孙林;杨宝珠;李鹅;薛艳林

宁夏大学林业与草业学院,宁夏 银川 750021||青贮饲料微生物资源开发与利用内蒙古自治区工程研究中心/内蒙古自治区农牧业科学院,内蒙古 呼和浩特 010031青贮饲料微生物资源开发与利用内蒙古自治区工程研究中心/内蒙古自治区农牧业科学院,内蒙古 呼和浩特 010031青贮饲料微生物资源开发与利用内蒙古自治区工程研究中心/内蒙古自治区农牧业科学院,内蒙古 呼和浩特 010031||西华师范大学生命科学学院,四川 南充 637002内蒙古大学,内蒙古 呼和浩特 010021

畜牧业

乳酸菌添加剂填装密度小麦秸秆黄贮微生物群落结构发酵品质

lactic acid bacteria additivecompaction densitywheat straw yellow storagemicrobial community structurefermentation quality

《畜牧与饲料科学》 2024 (002)

9-19 / 11

内蒙古农牧业青年创新基金项目(2023QNJJM01);中央引导地方科技发展资金项目(2022ZY0152).

10.12160/j.issn.1672-5190.2024.02.002

评论