This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
The objective of this study was to evaluate effects of adding agro-industrial by-products (soybean hulls and cornprocessing residue) and bacterial inoculant to Tifton 85 forage at ensiling on nutritional quality and bacterial colonization of resulting silages. The design was completely randomized in a 3 × 2 factorial scheme, with 6 treatments and 4 replicates. Treatments were: Tifton 85 forage; Tifton 85 + soybean hulls; Tifton 85 + corn-processing residue; Tifton 85 + bacterial inoculant; Tifton 85 + soybean hulls + inoculant; and Tifton 85 + corn-processing residue + inoculant. Inclusion of by-products increased dry matter and organic matter percentages of silages, while addition of soybean hulls improved crude protein concentration in silage. Total digestible nutrients in silages containing by-products were higher than in straight Tifton 85 silage. In addition, addition of by-products increased in vitro dry matter and organic matter digestibilities of resulting silages. Most treatments showed aerobic stability up to 144 hours after exposure to air, except for Tifton 85 + corn-processing residue without inoculant, which became unstable by 120 hours of exposure. Addition of by-products at ensiling of Tifton 85 forage appears beneficial but there seems little benefit in adding bacterial inoculant. More studies on a larger scale are needed to confirm these preliminary results, while feeding studies would determine any improvement in animal performance when fed silage containing by-products.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Avila et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: