An evaluation of an inoculant of Lactobacillus plantarum as an additive for grass silage for dairy cattle
- 1 August 1990
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Animal Science
- Vol. 51 (1), 1-13
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003356100005109
Abstract
Herbage from the first regrowth of perennial ryegrass based swards was direct-ensiled following treatment with either an inoculant of Lactobacillus plantarum (Ecosyl, Imperial Chemical Industries pic) at 3·0 1/t, formic acid (850 g/kg) at 2·9 1/t, or no additive (control). During harvesting, alternate loads of inoculant material were treated with an absorbent polymer (ammonium polyacrylamide) at the rate of 1 kg/t herbage and ensiled in separate 100-t capacity silos. The mean dry matter (DM) and water soluble carbohydrate concentrations of herbage used for the four treatments was 157 and 120 g/kg respectively. Lactic acid levels post ensiling increased more rapidly in inoculant-treated herbage than with the other treatments. Formic acid and inoculant-treated silages were well preserved whereas control and inoculant-plus-polymer silages were only moderately well preserved. Losses of DM during ensilage were greater with the formic acid treatment with DM recovery values of 0·78, 0·72, 0·76 and 0·73 for the control, formic acid, inoculant and inoculant-plus-polymer silages respectively. Treatment of herbage with an absorbent polymer prior to ensiling resulted in a proportional reduction in effluent volume of 0·2 whereas formic acid treatment increased effluent flow by 0·28. The silages were evaluated in a changeover design experiment with two periods each of 4 weeks duration, using 24 British Friesian dairy cows. Animals were housed in individual stalls and in addition to the treatment silages, received 5 kg/day of supplement containing 193 g crude protein per kg DM. Silage intakes were increased by proportionately 0·10, 0·14 and 0·05 respectively with the formic acid, inoculant and inoculant-plus-polymer treatments compared with the control. The increased silage intakes with the inoculant treatment were reflected in an increased milk yield of 1·1 kg milk per day whereas formic acid and inoculant-plus-polymer treatments had no significant effect, although formic acid treatment did result in a significant increase in milk fat concentration. There were no major differences between treatments in energy or nitrogen digestibility, when determined on a complete ration basis. In conclusion, a large milk yield response was obtained as a result of treatment of herbage with inoculant prior to ensiling and this resulted from increased silage and hence energy intake. Treatment with formic acid increased silage and energy intake but had no effect on milk energy output.This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Evaluation studies in the development of a commercial bacterial inoculant as an additive for grass silage. 1. Using pilot-scale tower silosGrass and Forage Science, 1989
- An evaluation through lactating cattle of a bacterial inoculant as an additive for grass silageGrass and Forage Science, 1989
- Use of a Silage Inoculant to Improve Feeding Stability and Intake of a Corn Silage-Grain DietJournal of Dairy Science, 1989
- The effect of some pre-treatments on proteolysis during the ensiling of herbageGrass and Forage Science, 1979
- Preservatives for Conserved Forage CropsJournal of Animal Science, 1978
- Potential of Chemical Preservation and Improvement of ForagesJournal of Dairy Science, 1977
- SILAGE AND MILK PRODUCTION. A COMPARISON BETWEEN WILTED GRASS SILAGES MADE WITH AND WITHOUT FORMIC ACIDGrass and Forage Science, 1973
- Formic acid as a silage additive for wet crops of cocksfoot and lucerneThe Journal of Agricultural Science, 1973
- Numbers and Types of Microorganisms in Silage and Effluent from Grass Ensiled with Different AdditivesActa Agriculturae Scandinavica, 1973
- Prediction of the Energy Value of Cow's MilkJournal of Dairy Science, 1965