检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:郑文芳 赵春林 王自柏 ZHENG Wenfang;ZHAO Chunlin;WANG Zibai(Qinzhou animal Disease Control and Prevention Center,Tianshui,Gansu,741000,China;Doctor and associate professor,School of bioengineering and technology,Tianshui Normal University,Tianshui,Gansu,741000,China;Undergraduate and senior veterinary physician,agricultural and rural comprehensive service center,Guanzi Town,Qinzhou District,Tianshui,Gansu,741000,China)
机构地区:[1]天水市秦州区动物疫病预防控制中心,甘肃天水741000 [2]天水师范学院生物工程与技术学院,甘肃天水741000 [3]秦州区关子镇农业农村综合服务中心,甘肃天水741000
出 处:《中国饲料》2022年第2期25-28,共4页China Feed
摘 要:文章旨在评估不同处理方式的秸秆对舍饲肉羊育肥增重的影响,采用秸秆综合处理技术,对肉羊进行了120 d的饲养试验。结果表明,与放牧组相比,2、3、4组平均末重增加6.48、8.45、10.75 kg,分别增加23.64%、30.84%、39.23%;在只均增重方面分别增加20.36%、31.57%、38.13%;在平均日增重方面舍饲3个组比放牧组分别增加54、71、112 g,依次提高23.68%、31.14%、49.12%,舍饲3个组平均出栏体重增加8.56 kg。在黄贮舍饲组与青贮舍饲组增重效果对比方面,黄贮舍饲组总增重1688.8 kg,日增重299 g;青贮舍饲组总增重1858.5 kg,日增重340 g;比黄贮舍饲组提高13.7%。在饲草料消耗方面,试验期饲草料消耗放牧组比黄贮舍饲组增加43.13%(小麦秸秆、配合料分别增加58.42%、66.22%),秸秆舍饲组比黄贮舍饲组增加4.13%(青贮饲料降低32.14%、小麦秸秆、配合料分别增加76.4%、14.67%);青贮舍饲组比黄贮舍饲组降低15.79%(青贮饲料、小麦秸秆、配合料分别降低10.7%、23.6%、19.1%)。在粪污循环处理方面,循环种草处理方式使粪污收集利用率达90%,对环境有优化作用。The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the effect of straw with different treatment methods on fattening and weight gain of house fed mutton sheep.The comprehensive treatment technology of straw was used to feed mutton sheep for 120 days.Results:Compared with the grazing group,the average end weight of house feeding group 2,3 and 4 increased by 6.48 kg,8.45 kg and 10.75 kg,respectively by 23.64%,30.84%and 39.23%;The average weight gain increased by 20.36%,31.57%and 38.13%respectively;In terms of average daily weight gain,the three house feeding groups increased by 54 g,71 g and 112 g respectively compared with the grazing group,which increased by 23.68%,31.14%and 49.12%respectively.The average weight of the three house feeding groups increased by 8.56 kg.In the comparison of weight gain effect between yellow silage house feeding group and silage grass house feeding group,the total weight gain of yellow silage house feeding group was 1688.8 kg,and the daily weight gain was 299 G,;The total weight gain of silage grass house feeding group was 1858.5 kg.,Daily gain 340 g,It was 13.7%higher than that in the Yellow storage house feeding group.In terms of forage consumption,during the experimental period,the forage consumption of grazing group was 43.13%higher than that of yellow silage group(58.42%and 66.22%higher than that of wheat straw and mixture respectively),and that of straw feeding group was 4.13%higher than that of yellow silage group(32.14%lower than silage,76.4%and 14.67%higher than that of yellow silage group);Compared with the Yellow silage corn straw house feeding group,the silage grass house feeding group decreased by 15.79%(silage,wheat straw and mixture decreased by 10.7%,23.6%and 19.1%respectively).In the aspect of fecal sewage recycling treatment,the recycling grass planting treatment method makes the collection and utilization rate of fecal sewage reach 90%,which can optimize the environment.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.49