Cited by 21Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodAnimal Nutrition and Physiology

Effect of two additives on the fermentation, in vitro digestibility and aerobic security of S orghum–sudangrass hybrid silages

Han, L. Y., Li, J., Na, R. S., Yu, Z., Zhou, H.·2015·Grass and Forage Science

Abstract

Abstract Two additives (Silo Guard (SG) and propionic acid (PA)) were tested for their effects on the quality and aerobic security of sorghum–sudangrass hybrid silages (JC‐1 and WC‐2). Two sorghum–sudangrass hybrid varieties were harvested for ensiling without additives (CK) or after the following treatments: SG at 0·5% of fresh forage or PA at 0·5% of fresh forage, with three replicates per treatment. The addition of SG and PA both affected the fermentation quality and chemical composition of the silages by lowering pH and NH3‐N/TN and increasing lactic acid, the LA/TA ratio, WSC and CP concentrations compared with the untreated silages. In vitro DM digestibility (IVDMD), in vitro NDF digestibility (IVNDFD) and in vitro CP digestibility (IVCPD) were increased by SG in the JC‐1 silages and WC‐2 silages. Both additives improved the aerobic stability of sorghum–sudangrass hybrid silages. Furthermore, the additives reduced the mould counts and the aflatoxin and zearalenone levels compared with the untreated silages following aerobic exposure. Therefore, ensiling two sorghum–sudangrass hybrid varieties resulted in high‐quality silages. The addition of SG and PA improved silage quality, in vitro digestibility and aerobic security.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/gfs.12092

Cites

43 of 43 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?

  • The reason may be that LAB degrades part of lignin and releases hemicellulose and cellulose, which in turn are broken down by rumen microorganisms into monosaccharides that are more easily absorbed by ruminants, accelerating the degradation of mixed silage in the rumen, increasing the effective in situ degradation rate of DM and DNF.

    “The reason may be that LAB degrades part of lignin and releases hemicellulose and cellulose, which in turn are broken down by rumen microorganisms into monosaccharides that are more easily absorbed by ruminants, accelerating the degradation of mixed silage in the rumen. In turn, this increases the effective in situ degradation rate of DM and DNF [33].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Han, L. Y., Li, J., Na, R. S., Yu, Z., & Zhou, H.
Affiliations
  • China Agricultural University (CN)
  • Inner Mongolia Agricultural University (CN)
Corresponding author
Yu, Z.
Venue
Grass and Forage Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-12-07
Volume
70
Issue
1
Pages
185-194
ISSN
  • 0142-5242 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2494
OpenAlex
W2041751173
Cited by
21
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
0.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Grass and Forage Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
Keywords
sorghum-sudangrass, silage additives, propionic acid, silage fermentation quality, aerobic stability, in vitro digestibility, nitrogen balance, lactic acid, mold count, aflatoxins, zearalenone, silage fermentation

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