Cited by 31Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyAgricultural Engineering and Mechanization

Effect of ensiling process of total mixed ration on fermentation profile, nutrient loss and in situ ruminal degradation characteristics of diet

Miyaji, Makoto, Matsuyama, Hiroki, Nonaka, Kazuhisa·2017·Animal Science Journal

Abstract

This experiment aimed to determine the changes in chemical composition, fermentation profile, in situ disappearance characteristics, and nutrient losses of ensiled total mixed ration (TMR) containing steam-flaked corn or brown rice (BR) during storage. TMRs for dairy cows, containing either steam-flaked corn or BR at 31.9% with 15.2% rye silage, 40.5% alfalfa silage, 5.0% beet pulp and 7.0% soybean meal, were prepared (dry matter (DM) basis). Each TMR was placed in a plastic drum silo, stored at 23°C in an air-conditioned room and sampled 0, 7, 14, 30, 90 and 210 days after preparation. In both grain sources, the fermentation products increased, while DM and starch storage losses increased and starch content greatly decreased during storage. The rapidly degradable fraction and effective ruminal degradability of DM, crude protein and starch increased during storage. These changes of dietary characteristics were large during 30 days of storage, but small after 90 days of storage. Replacing corn with BR led to increased fermentation products, starch loss and effective ruminal degradability of the ensiled TMR. These results indicate that the ensiling process of TMR changes the dietary characteristics and replacing corn with BR in TMR had a large impact on these dietary characteristics.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/asj.12610

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miyaji, M., Matsuyama, H., & Nonaka, K.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science (JP)
  • Yamagata University (JP)
Corresponding author
Miyaji, Makoto
Venue
Animal Science Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-04-25
Volume
88
Issue
1
Pages
134-139
ISSN
  • 1344-3941 (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-0929
OpenAlex
W2344945026
Cited by
31
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Animal Science Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Agricultural Engineering and Mechanization
Keywords
total mixed ration, silage fermentation, steam-flaked corn, brown rice, dairy cattle feed, in situ ruminal degradability, nutrient loss, starch degradation, rye silage, alfalfa silage, feed composition
MeSH terms
Animals, Cattle, Zea mays, Diet, Dietary Proteins, Digestion, Fermentation, Food, Male, Oryza, Rumen, Silage, Starch, Time Factors, Food Storage

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review