Cited by 52Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food

The effects of stage of growth and additives with or without cellulase on fermentation and in vitro degradation characteristics of Leymus chinensis silage

Zhang, Q., Yu, Z., Yang, H., Na, R. S.·2016·Grass and Forage Science

Abstract

Abstract This study evaluated the effects of different combinations of added lactic acid bacteria and cellulase applied at two growth stages on chemical composition andin vitrorumen digestibility ofLeymus chinensissilage. Fresh grass was harvested at early heading stage (S1) and late heading stage (S2), respectively, and ensiled with five additives: 200 U cellulase (C) kg−1fresh matter (FM), 1 × 105colony‐forming units (cfu)Lactobacillus plantarum(LP) g−1FM, 1 × 105 cfuLb. casei(LC) g−1FM,LP+C,LC+C and a control (CK). Four replicates of each treatment were weighed into 5‐L plastic buckets, and the mini silos were stored at ambient temperature (~30°C) for 60 d.Leymus chinensisharvested at S2 showed relatively higher neutral detergent fibre content, coliform bacteria count and lower crude protein content than S1. All additives decreased thepHand ammonia nitrogen (NH3‐N) content ofL. chinensissilage (P < 0·001) except C.LP+C andLC+C decreased fibre content and increased water‐soluble carbohydrate content (P < 0·001). The silages were further anaerobically incubatedin vitroat 39°C for 48 h with buffered rumen fluids of lactating cows.Leymus chinensisharvested at S2 showed lowerin vitrodry‐matter disappearance,NH3‐N, total volatile fatty acid (VFA) content and higher average gas production rate (P < 0·05) than S1. In conclusion,Leymus chinensisshould not be harvested too late. Compared with other treatments, a combination ofLb. casei(LC) with cellulase resulted in better fermented silage, but further testing is needed to confirm its efficacy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/gfs.12210

Cites

51 of 51 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
Zhang, Q., Yu, Z., Yang, H., & Na, R. S.
Affiliations
  • China Agricultural University (CN)
  • Inner Mongolia Agricultural University (CN)
Corresponding author
Yu, Z.
Venue
Grass and Forage Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-12-30
Volume
71
Issue
4
Pages
595-606
ISSN
  • 0142-5242 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2494
OpenAlex
W2218820119
Cited by
52
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5
FWCI
6.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Grass and Forage Science (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Special Fund of National Public Welfare Industry (Agriculture) R & D Program (201303061)
  • China Forage and Grass Research System (CARS-35)
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
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Keywords
Leymus chinensis, silage additives, cellulase, lactic acid bacteria, Lactobacillus plantarum, Lactobacillus casei, silage fermentation, ammonia nitrogen, volatile fatty acids, dry matter disappearance, forage chemical composition

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