不同厌氧处理方式对鲜麦秸品质、活体外瘤胃发酵及甲烷产量的影响  

Effects of different anaerobic treatments of wheat straw on its quality,in vitro rumen fermentation and methane production

作　　者：徐芳 降磊 张元庆[1] 张丹丹[1] 王曦[1] 程景[1] 靳光[1] 孙志强 张变英[1] 孙锐锋[1] 薛艳蓉[1] 李博[1] 陈泽[1] 陈剑波[1] XU Fang;JIANG Lei;ZHANG Yuanqing;ZHANG Dandan;WANG Xi;CHENG Jing;JIN Guang;SUN Zhiqiang;ZHANG Bianying;SUN Ruifeng;XUE Yanrong;LI Bo;CHEN Ze;CHEN Jianbo(Institute of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine,Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Taiyuan,Shanxi Province 030032,China;Institute of Agricultural Resources and Economics,Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Taiyuan,Shanxi Province 030032,China;College of Animal Science and Technology,China Agricultural University,Beijing 100193,China)

机构地区：[1]山西省农业科学院畜牧兽医研究所,山西太原030032 [2]山西省农业科学院农业资源与经济研究所,山西太原030032 [3]中国农业大学动物科学技术学院,北京海淀100193

出　　处：《中国饲料》2019年第11期69-74,共6页China Feed

基　　金：国家公益性行业(农业)科研专项(201503134);山西省农业科学院重点攻关项目(YGG1611);牛高产低排营养调控山西省科技创新培育团队建设(201605D131043)

摘　　要：为研究不同厌氧处理方式对鲜麦秸品质、活体外瘤胃发酵及甲烷产量的影响,试验分为5个处理组,分别为全株微贮组、秸秆黄贮组、秸秆微贮组、秸秆氨化组和秸秆碱化组。其中全株微贮组、秸秆微贮组秸秆经铡切处理后分别喷洒5×104cfu/g混菌悬浮液,秸秆黄贮组喷洒相同质量的无菌水;秸秆氨化组按照干物质5%喷洒尿素溶液,秸秆碱化组按秸秆干物质4%喷洒生石灰熟化澄清液。结果表明:秸秆微贮组、全株微贮组感官性能优于其他处理组;与秸秆黄贮组相比,全株微贮组、秸秆微贮组、秸秆氨化组及秸秆碱化组粗蛋白质含量分别提高219.21%(P<0.05)、16.75%(P>0.05)、112.81%(P<0.05)、13.79%(P>0.05);全株微贮组的中性洗涤纤维、酸性洗涤纤维含量约是其他处理组的1/2(P<0.05);与秸秆黄贮组相比,秸秆微贮组、秸秆氨化组、秸秆碱化组中性洗涤纤维显著降低8.24%、13.01%、9.09%,酸性洗涤纤维显著降低17.67%、17.68%及15.61%;产气量:全株微贮组>秸秆氨化组>其他处理组;秸秆黄贮组比全株微贮组、秸秆氨化组体外消化率降低了56.39%、24.03%;与秸秆微贮组相比,全株微贮组体外发酵液NH3-N、TVFA、乙酸、丙酸、丁酸、戊酸、异丁酸及异戊酸含量分别提高41.29%、20.99%、10.48%、41.99%、14.61%、166.67%、43.75%及64.71%(P<0.05)。由此可知,秸秆氨化处理和全株小麦经微生物处理均可提高其感官性能,提升产气量、挥发酸及消化率,全株小麦经微生物处理性能优于各秸秆处理组。This experiment aimed to study the effects of different treatment methods on the quality of wheat straw,methane production and its in vitro simulated rumen fermentation.The experiment was divided into five treatment groups,namely whole plant micro-storage group,straw yellow storage group,straw micro-storage group,straw ammoniation group and straw alkalization group.The whole plant micro-storage group and the straw micro-storage group were treated with 5×104 cfu/g mixed bacteria suspension after the cutting,and the straw yellow storage group was added with the same quality of sterile water.The straw ammoniation group and straw alkalization group respectively was treated with 5%urea of dry matter and 4%lime of dry matter.The results showed that the sensory properties of the whole plant microstorage group and the whole plant microstorage group were better than those of other treatments.Compared with the straw yellow storage group,the crude protein content of the whole plant microstorage group,the straw microstorage group,the straw ammoniation group and the straw alkalization group were increased by 219.21%,16.75%,112.81%,13.79%,respectively(P<0.05).The content of neutral detergent fibers and acid detergent fibers in the whole plant microstorage group was about 1/2 of that in the other treatment groups(P<0.05).Compared with the straw yellow storage group,the neutral detergent fiber were decreased by 8.24%,13.01%,9.09%,and the acid detergent fiber decreased by 17.67%,17.68%and 15.61%in the straw microstorage group,ammoniation group and alkalization group(P<0.05).Gas production:whole plant microstorage group>straw ammoniation group>other treatment groups.Compared with the digestibility in vitro of whole plant microstorage group and straw ammoniation group,the straw yollow storage group reduced by 56.39%and 24.03%(P<0.05).Compared with straw microstorage group,the contents of NH3-N,TVFA,acetic acid,propionic acid,butyric acid,valeric acid,isobutyric acid and isovaleric acid in vitro fermentation broth of whole plant mi

关 键 词：小麦 全株 秸秆 不同处理 品质 瘤胃发酵 

分 类 号：S816.5[农业科学—饲料科学]