Storage of small bale silage and haylage–influence of storage period on fermentation variables and microbial composition
Abstract
Abstract An experiment investigating changes in fermentation variables and microbial composition during storage of small‐bale silage and haylage was performed. Haylage was defined as silage with a dry‐matter (DM) content exceeding 500 g kg−1. Grass was wilted to three different DM contents, and baled into silage (350 g DM kg−1), haylage with a low DM content (550 g kg−1) and haylage with high DM content (700 g kg−1) in small rectangular‐shaped bales (0·80 m × 0·48 m × 0·36 m) that were individually wrapped. Bales were stored for short (2 months) or long (14 months) periods before opening and sampling. Silage had higher concentrations of fermentation products and a lower pH than either of the two haylage types. In general, long‐term storage influenced all fermentation variables except concentrations of butyric acid and succinic acid, and yeast counts were higher after 14 months than 2 months of storage. However, silage changed in more fermentation variables during storage than the two haylage types. Although differences between short‐ and long‐term stored silage were found, linear correlations between short‐ and long‐term stored bales were present for all chemical variables. Pearson's correlation coefficients were highest for lactic acid, followed by pH.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Successful ensiling results in reduced storage loss, preservation of substantial nutrients and edible silage with ideal dry matter content, whereas unsuccessful ensiling produces bad silage containing undesirable microorganisms such as yeasts, moulds, mycotoxins and pathogenic bacteria.
“Successful ensiling process, resulted in a reduced storage loss, preserve substantial amount of nutrients and produced edible silage with an ideal dry matter content but unsuccessful ensiling process produced bad silage that contains undesirable microorganisms like yeasts, moulds, mycotoxins, pathogenic bacteria [7,8].”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 47 · Cited by 30
- Authors
- Müller, C. E., Pauly, T. M., & Udén, P.
- Affiliations
- Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Müller, C. E.
- ORCID
- Müller, C. E.
- Venue
- Grass and Forage Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-08
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 274-283
- ISSN
- 0142-5242 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2494
- OpenAlex
- W1974489815
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.06
- 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
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Agricultural Engineering and Mechanization
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
- Keywords
- haylage, microbial community composition, dry matter content, lactic acid, silage pH, yeast count, butyrate, succinic acid, silage quality
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