Abstract #607
Section: Ruminant Nutrition
Session: Ruminant Nutrition: Manipulating rumen function
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Tuesday 3:00 PM–3:15 PM
Location: Panzacola H-2
Session: Ruminant Nutrition: Manipulating rumen function
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Tuesday 3:00 PM–3:15 PM
Location: Panzacola H-2
# 607
Inoculant effects on silage fermentation and aerobic stability of sorghum wet ethanol co-product/roughage blends.
Pedro R. B. Campanili*1, Jhones O. Sarturi1, Michael L. Galyean1, Sara Trojan1, Lauren A. Ovinge1, Barbara J. M. Lemos1, Alex Thompsom1, David Klein1, Mendu Venugopal1, Bradley Johnson1, 1Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX.
Key Words: distillers, ensiling, stability
Inoculant effects on silage fermentation and aerobic stability of sorghum wet ethanol co-product/roughage blends.
Pedro R. B. Campanili*1, Jhones O. Sarturi1, Michael L. Galyean1, Sara Trojan1, Lauren A. Ovinge1, Barbara J. M. Lemos1, Alex Thompsom1, David Klein1, Mendu Venugopal1, Bradley Johnson1, 1Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX.
Anaerobic storage of blends containing sorghum wet distillers grains plus solubles (WDGS) and low-quality roughages with or without microbial inoculants (DeLaval Manufacturing) on fermentation, losses, and aerobic stability were evaluated. Experimental silos (n = 90; 18.9-L plastic containers) were assigned randomly to 1 of the 15 treatments using a 3 × 3 + 6 treatment arrangement as follows: 65:35 blend of WDGS and one of the following roughage sources: wheat straw (WS), corn stalks (CS), and alfalfa hay:cottonseed hull (CSH) blend, with or without inoculant (n = 5; inoculant A and B, all roughages; C, D, and E only for CSH); roughages with no inoculants (cotton burrs (CB), and corn dry DGS:WDGS blend (52:48; DGS-blend); and pure WDGS. Data were analyzed using GLIMMIX procedures of SAS with d 0 as a covariate. Regardless of inoculation, pure WDGS showed greater (P < 0.01) total DM losses (8 vs. 2%), and less acetate (0.44 vs. 0.80%, DM basis) than silage blends. Low acetate concentration (0.13% of DM) was observed on d 0, regardless of treatment. Disappearance of fiber fractions was greater (P < 0.01) for blends than for pure WDGS. Inoculation tended (P = 0.07) to increase ADF digestibility for the CSH blend, and increased (P < 0.01) fiber disappearance for WS blends. Greater (P < 0.01) disappearance of NDF and ADF was observed for the WS blend plus inoculants A or B than for the average of other roughage treatments (16.80 vs. 4.57%, and 12.27 vs. 0% for NDF and ADF, respectively). Blends of CSH and CS had less (P ≤ 0.04) fat loss when inoculant A or B was applied vs. those without inoculant. The CSH blends took more time (P = 0.04; 6 h) to lose aerobic stability than other treatments. Independent of inoculation, pH and losses increased (P < 0.01) during the aerobic stability for WS, but was less for CSH, with CS blends being intermediate. Inoculation positively affected fermentation profile of ensiled WDGS/low-quality roughage blends, although this depended on type of roughage. Silo post-opening management of blends must be considered once it can account as an important source of loss.
Key Words: distillers, ensiling, stability