| تعداد نشریات | 282 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 80 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 3,220 |
| تعداد مقالات | 35,690 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 53,577,690 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 92,856,544 |
اثر افزودن سه نوع ماده خشبی بر ویژگیهای سیلاژی چغندر علوفهای | ||
| چغندرقند | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 40، شماره 2، مهر 1403، صفحه 211-224 اصل مقاله (672.95 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: کامل علمی - پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/jsb.2025.367605.1377 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| علیرضا چگنی* 1؛ مهدی صادقی شعاع2؛ بهروز یاراحمدی1؛ علیرضا آقاشاهی3 | ||
| 1بخش تحقیقات علوم دامی، مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان لرستان، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی | ||
| 2استادیار مؤسسه تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیه بذر چغندرقند، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، کرج، ایران. | ||
| 3موسسه علوم دامی کشور، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، کرج، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| این آزمایش با هدف سیلوکردن چغندر علوفهای و بررسی ویژگیهای سیلاژی و تعیین ارزش تغذیهای آن در قالب طرح کاملاً تصادفی با چهار تیمار و پنج تکرار، اجرا شد. تیمار اول: 100 درصد چغندر علوفهای، تیمار دوم: 90 درصد چغندرعلوفهای+10 درصد کاه گندم، تیمار سوم: 90درصد چغندر علوفهای+10 درصد کاه لوبیا، تیمار چهارم: 90 درصد چغندرعلوفهای+ 10 درصد پیت نیشکر بود. مخلوط مربوط به هر تیمار به مقدار 10 کیلوگرم تهیه و در کیسههای پلاستیکی فشرده و 45 روزدر دمای oc15 نگهداری شدند. بالاترین مقدار اسیدیته (pH) در سیلاژ 90 درصد چغندر علوفهای+10 درصد کاه لوبیا و کمترین آن در سیلاژ 100 درصد چغندر علوفهای بود (0.05>P). بالاترین مقدار پروتئین خام و نیتروزن آمونیاکی در سیلاژ 100 درصد چغندر علوفهای به ترتیب 29/14 درصد و 88/90 میلیمول در لیتر و کمترین آن در تیمار سیلاژ 90 درصد چغندرعلوفهای+10 درصد پیت نیشکر به مقدار ۷/۷ درصد و ۵6/۵8 میلی مول در لیتر بدست آمد (0.05>P). بیشترین میزان کربوهیدراتهای محلول در سیلاژ 100 درصد چغندر علوفهای 74/22 درصد و کمترین آن در سیلاژ مخلوط 90 درصد چغندر علوفهای+10 درصد کاه لوبیا به میزان 25/8 درصد بود (0.05>P). بالاترین مقدار اسید استیک در سیلاژ مخلوط 90 درصد چغندر علوفهای+10 درصد کاه لوبیا به مقدار 01/13 مشاهده گردید. مقدار اسید لاکتیک در بین تیمارها معنیدار نشد. بالاترین مقدار ظرفیت بافری در تیمارهای سیلاژ مخلوط 90 درصد چغندر علوفهای+10 درصد کاه لوبیا و 90 درصد چغندرعلوفهای+10 درصد پیت نیشکر بود (0.05>P). پایداری هوازی سیلاژ چغندرعلوفهای خالص کمتر از سایر تیمارها بود. سیلو کردن چغندرعلوفهای خالص امکان پذیر میباشد و افزودن 10 درصد علوفههای خشبی همانند کاه گندم، کاه لوبیا و پیت نیشکر که ضمن جلوگیری از اتلاف شیرابهای، در افزایش ماندگاری این سیلاژ نقش مثبتی دارد، قابل توصیه می باشد. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| اسیدهای سیلاژ؛ پایداری هوازی؛ چغندر علوفهای؛ سیلاژ؛ ظرفیت بافری | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Effect of three different roughages additives on the silage characteristics of fodder beet (Beta vulgaris L.) | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Alireza Chegeni1؛ Mehdi Sadeghi-shoae2؛ behrouz Yarahmadi1؛ alireza aghashahi3 | ||
| 1Animal Science Research Department, Lorestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, | ||
| 2Assistant professor of Sugar Beet Seed Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran. | ||
| 3Animal Science Research Institute of Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Extended Abstract Introduction Fodder beet, with its high yield (120 t/h;18-20% DM) and low water demand compared with fodder corn and alfalfa, can provide part of the livestock's nutritional needs during autumn and winter seasons. One of the problems of storing the root of fodder beet, despite its high nutritional value, is its low durability time cocerned with its high moisture content. Due to its high soluble carbohydrate content, the root has a good ability to reach the appropriate pH (3.79-4.33) and produce silage with excellent quality. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate its storage methods, especially ensiling with a combination of available and inexpensive moisture-absorbing roughages materials such as wheat straw, bean straw, and sugarcane pith, which absorb the beet's leachate (especially soluble carbohydrates) and make them palatable. The present study conducted to evaluate the feature of fodder beet silage mixed with dry roughages to achieve the above objectives. Material and methods After harvest, the fodder beet roots were cleaned, crushed, and ensiled with four treatments and five replications including: 1) FB: 100% fodder beet, 2) WSFB: 90% fodder beet+10% wheat straw, 3) BSFB: 90% fodder beet+10% bean straw, 4) PFB: 90% fodder beet+10% sugarcane pith. Ten kg of the material of each treatment were compressed, air-tight and tightly ensiled in plastic bags, and placed at 15 °C. After 45 days, the pH, dry matter, and soluble carbohydrates of the samples were immediately determined, and the rest of the samples were dried at 60°C for 72 hours to measure DM, ASH, ADF, NDF, and CP. To measure DM, ASH was measured according to Van Soest et al. (1991). Crud protein was determined according to AOAC (2010). The method introduced by Lengerken and Zimmermann (1991) used to determine soluble carbohydrates. To measure pH, 100 ml of distilled water added to 10 g of fresh silage sample, shaked for 10 minutes, filtered by passing through a cotton cloth and finally the pH of the obtained solution recorded using a digital pH meter. Aerobic stability measured according to the method of Morgan et al. (1966). The buffering capacity of silages measured according to the method of the American Feed Industry Association (AFIA 2011). To measure volatile fatty acids, a gas chromatography device used. Data were analyzed in a completely randomized design using SAS software (Ver. 9.1). The multiple comparison method was used to compare means. Duncan's range was used at a 5% confidence level. Result and discussion The color of the silages in pure FB silage was too dark brown, which could be due to the property of root that tends to darken quickly after being sliced. The color of the other treatments was brown, so that the degree of darkness in WSFB and BSFB silages was less and lighter brown, respectively, however the color was dark brown in PFB treatment due to the brown color of the sugarcane pith. A suitable fermentation odor was noticeable in all experimental treatments. The texture of all silages in different treatments observed without sticking. The highest pH value was found in fodder beet silage contained b ean straw (4.24) and the lowest pH was 3.85 in the fodder beet silage without additives (P < 0.05). In the current experiment, all silages had an optimal pH range of 3.79 to 4.33. The highest values of DM, NDF and ADF were found in silage with wheat straw and the lowest was in pure fodder beet silage (P < 0.05). Ensiling FB with 10% of dry roughages absorbed silage leachate and prevented the loss of its nutrients. The highest CP and Ammonia-N in pure fodder beet silage was 14.29%, 90.88mmol/l, respectively, and the lowest amounts (7.7% and 58.56 mmol/l) were found in the fodder beet silage with sugarcane pith (P < 0.05). The increase in CP in FB silage is likely due to the growth of beneficial bacteria fermenting the existed carbohydrates. The lower pH of FB silage compared with other treatments, indicating greater fermentation due to more soluble carbohydrates and greater bacterial growth in the silage. The concentration of ammonia nitrogen in silage is an indication of the degree of protein breakdown, perhaps because the more acidic environment of silage was the reason for the breakdown of proteins. The highest (22.74%) and the lowest (8.25%) soluble carbohydrates were in the pure fodder beet silage andwas in fodder beet silage with bean straw, respectively (P < 0.05). The highest acetic acid (13.01) was observed in fodder beet silage with bean straw. The lactic acid was not significant among treatments. The highest amounts of buffering capacity were obtained in fodder beet silage with bean straw and pith (P < 0.05). The aerobic stability was lower in pure fodder beet silage than other treatments. Conclusion Due to the characteristics of fodder beet, which is rich in soluble carbohydrates, ensiling fodder beet is possible, and adding 10% of dry roughages such as wheat straw, bean straw, and sugarcane pith, which prevents leachate loss and play a positive role in increasing the durability of this silage is recommended. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Acids silage, Buffering capacity, Fodder beet, Silage | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abbasi A, Fadaeli H, Zahedifar M, Mirhadi SA, Grami A, Timuranjad N, Alavi SM. Tables of chemical composition of Iranian livestock and poultry feed sources. Animal Science Research Institute of Iran Press, 2005; pp. 36 (In Persian). Alipour M, Azarfar A, Kiani A, and Khaladi M. Effect of adding monensin with and without metaphyses on rumen fermentation parameters and fatty acid pattern of fattening lambs of Farahani. Iranian Animal Science. 2017; 48(1): 89-99 (In Persian). Anonymous. Laboratory Methods Manual, Australian Fodder Industry Association Ltd. Victoria, Australia. Inc. Publication; 2011 Feb. p.1–103, p. Report No.:03/001. Babaee B, Bazrafshan M, Mahmoudi SB. Evaluation of the silage potential of resistant to rhizomania sugar beet lines. Journal of Sugar Beet. 2019; 35 (1), 1-12. (In Persian with English abstract). Doi: https://doi.org/10.22092/jsb.2019.124188.1206. Bolsen KK, Ashbell G, Weinberg ZG. Silage fermentation and silage additives. Australian Journal of Applied Sciences. 1996; 9. 483–493. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.1996.483. Chegani A, Abedi M, Ghorbani K, Mohammadi Saei M, Behrouz Y, Shahvardi M, Aghashahi A, Fadaeli H, Papi N, Rahnamaiyan M. Investigating the possibility of ensiling fodder beet root (tuber) with different wood fodder, Animal Science Research Institute Publication; . 2022; p.. 1-45 p. Report No.:5435. (In Persian with English abstract) Chegeni A, Yarahamdi B, Shahvardi M, Mohammadi Saei M, Biranvand MH, Aghashahai AR, Fadaeli H, Kazemizadeh A. Investigating the effect of fodder beet on performance, carcass traits and blood parameters of fattening male lambs. Journal of Animal Production. 2023; 25(1): 59-69. (In Persian with English abstract). Doi: https://doi.org/10.22059/jap.2023.346472.623700. Dalley DE, Malcolm BJ, Chakwizira E, De Ruiter JM. Range of quality characteristics of New Zealand forages and implications for reducing the nitrogen leaching risk from grazing dairy cows. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research. 2017; 60(3): 319-32. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00288233.2017.1345762. De Ruiter JM, Clough J, Macdonald K, Glassey CB. Impacts of forage cropping on Taranaki dairy farms. Proceedings of the 4th Australasian dairy science symposium. Lincoln University. 2010; p. 326–333. Dianti Tilkiq A, Mirjalili A. Investigation and comparison of palatability of five types of pasture plants for all kinds of livestock in Yazd region. Journal of Research and Construction. 2007; 20(3). 69-73. (In Persian with English abstract). Dulphy JP, Demarquilly C. Fodder beets in animal husbandry. Fourrages. 2000; 163: 307-314. Filya I. The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the fermentation, Aerobic stability, and ruminal degradability of low dry matter corn and sorghum silages. Journal of Dairy Science.2003; 86(11): 3575-3581. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73963-0. Hedayatipour A, Khorosh M, Qurbani G, Al-Madras A, Ebadi MR. Comparison of chemical properties and degradability of forage and silage of sorghum with corn in laboratory conditions and nylon bag method. Iranian Journal of Animal Science Research. 2011; 4(3):224-232. (In Persian with English abstract). Horwitz W, Latimer GW. Official methods of analysis of association of official analytical chemists. Publisher: AOAC International, Gaithersburg, MD. 2010; 18th Edition, Washington, DC. Jalilund Q. Investigating the nutritional value of the leaf, root and whole plant of fodder beet and its silage (Master's thesis). University of Zabul-Iran; 2013. (In Persian with English abstract). Jenkinson BAB. Effect of winter crop systems on rumen degradation and grazing behavior of dairy cows (Bachelor thesis). Lincoln University; 2013. Kalanter M, Yeganehparast M, Fazali H, Aghashahi A, Khojsteh Ki M. Investigating the physical and chemical parameters of fodder beet (Beta vulgaris L.) silage with and without the use of Lactobacillus Buchneri. Livestock Animal Production Research. 20212022; 11(1): 79-90. (In Persian with English abstract). Doi: https://doi.org/doi: 10.22124/ar.2022.19185.1602. Karimi H. Cultivation and modification of fodder plants, University of Tehran Publishing and Printing Institute, 2005; pp.432. (In Persian). Lengerken VJ & Zimmermann K. Handbuch Futtermittelprüfung. Berlin: Deutscher.1991; PPpp. 650. McDonald P, Edwards RA, Greenhalgh JFD, Morgan CA, Sinclair LA, Wilkinson RG. Animal Nutrition. 7th ed. Longman Group Publishers, UK, Harlow, 2011; pp. 693. McDonald P, Edwards RA, Greenhalgh JFD, Morgan CA. Animal Nutrition. Longman Scientific and Technical Publishers, New York. USA, 1995; PPpp.607. McDonald P, Henderson AR, Heron SJE. The Biochemistry of Silage, Chalcombe Publishers, UK.,1991; pp. 340. http://books.google.com/books?id=oUcjAQAAMAAJ (accessed on 1 July 2023). Mehrdadfar M, Botanical, morphological, general and nutritional characteristics of fodder beetroot. Moghan Agriculture and Animal Husbandry Company report. 2014; Parsabad, Moghan, Iran. 2014. (In Persian). Mirzaei SA, Borji M, Fazali H, Azizi RA. Determination of chemical composition of bean straw and its comparison with wheat straw. Proceedings of the 6th National Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resources 2017 January 4; Tehran, Iran. National ID: NACONF06_155. (In Persian). Moeini Zadeh S, Khadem AA, Asadi Alamoti A, and Afzal Zadeh A. The effect of adding dry alfalfa as a moisture absorber on the quality of fermentation and effluent production in corn silage. Journal of Animal Production. 2013; 15(1): 31-43. (In Persian with English abstract). Momtahen J, Chemical composition, ruminal degradability and fermentation potential by gas production method of fodder beet silage in feeding ruminants (master's thesis). University of Malayer-Iran; 2019. (In Persian with English abstract). Morgan JP, Weinberg ZG, Ashbell G, Hen Y, Owen TR. A comparison of two methods for the evaluation of the aerobic stability of whole crop wheat silage. Proceeding of 6th International Silage conference; 1966 Aberystwyth, UK. 1966; pp. 162-163. Offer NW, Al-Rwidah MN. The use of absorbant materials to control loss from grass silage: experiments with drum silos. Research Development. 1989; 6(1): 71-76. Papi N. Effects of feeding Jerusalem artichoke fodder silage on feed intake digestibility and microbial protein synthesis in sheep. Animal Production. 2018; 20(2): p:257-268. (In Persian with English abstract). Doi: https://doi.org/doi.org/10.22059/jap.2018.247956.623246. Sadeghi Shua M, Rezaei J, Nemati Agh Braz R, Nadali F, Jalilian A, Mirzaei MR, Mehdikhani P. Test to determine the agricultural value of fodder beet varieties. The Final Report of the Research Institute for Breeding and Preparation of Sugar beet Seeds. 2018; 18 p. (In Persian with English abstract). Seglar B. Fermentation analysis and silage quality testing. Proceedings of the Minnesota Dairy Health Conference, College of veterinary medicine, University of Minnesota. 2003; 29 May, Minnesota, p.119-136. Shakeri P, Fadaeli F, Aghashahi A, Safai S, Shakri AA. The effect of using complete feed silage based on fodder corn in feeding fattening lambs. Livestock Production Research. 2020; 36: 88-95. Doi: https://doi:10.22069/ejrr.2022.19726.1823(In Persian with English abstract). Shindarska Z, Kirov V, Kostadinova G, Baykov B. Comparative assessment of plant resources as substrates for bioshlam production. Agricultural Science and Technology. 2013; 5 (4): 438- 442. Doi: https://doi:file:///C:/Users/Chegeni/Downloads/39%20(1).pdf Touqir NA, Khan MA, Sarwar M, Nisa MU, Ali CS, Lee WS, Lee HJ, Kim HS. Feeding value of Jambograss silage and Mott grass silage for lactating Nili buffaloes. Asian-Aust J Animal Science. 2007; 20: 523-528. Doi: https://doi:10.5713/ajas.2007.523. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science.1991; 74: 3583-3597. Doi: https://https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2. Wickson EJ. The California vegetables in garden and field: A Manual of practice, with and without irrigation, for semitropical countries. Publisher HardPress. 2014; pp.378. Wilkinson JM. Assessing silage quality. pp.198-200. In: Wilkinson JM.(Ed.), Analysis and Clinical Assessment of Silage. Chalcombe Publications, UK.2005. Yaganehparast M, Kalantar Neyestanaki M, Fazaeli H, Aghashshi A, Khojastehkey M, Sadeghzadeh SS, Kadkhodaie A. The effect of adding wheat straw and Lactobacillus buchneri on the quality of fodder beet. Animal Science Journal (Pajouhesh and Sazandegi). 2022; 35(135). 133-146. (In Persian with English abstract). | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 446 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 240 |
||