Cited by 877Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production

Microbiology of ensiling

Open access
Pahlow, Günter, Muck, Richard E., Driehuis, Frank, Elferink, Stefanie J. W. H. Oude, Spoelstra, Sierk F.·2003·Agronomy Monographs

Abstract

In many parts of the world, conserved forage is an essential component of ruminant diets during those intervals when fresh crops are unavailable. A. J. G. Barnett subdivided the process of ensiling into four principal phases of different length and intensity, which cannot be separated precisely from each other. When silage is used as a feed source on a farm, several events take place that have relevance to the number of clostridial spores in silage and milk. During mowing and harvesting of a silage crop, contamination of the crop by soil particles, which contain clostridial spores, is unavoidable. The microbial population of standing or freshly harvested forage crops is considerably different from that found during the process of silage fermentation or in the final product. Most inoculants consist exclusively of homofermentative or facultatively heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria because these are the most efficient producers of lactic acid.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2134/agronmonogr42.c2

Cites

225 of 225 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Pahlow, G., Muck, R. E., Driehuis, F., Elferink, S. J. W. H. O., & Spoelstra, S. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Nederlands Instituut Voor Zuivel Oonderzoek (NL)
Venue
Agronomy Monographs
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-01
Pages
31-93
ISSN
  • 0065-4663 (ISSN-L)
  • 2156-3276
OpenAlex
W2565640431
Cited by
877
References
225
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 61 · 2024: 77 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 91 · 2021: 91 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 15
Type
other
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Agronomy monograph/Agronomy (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
  • OpenAgrar (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
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
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
Keywords
silage fermentation, silage spoilage, forage preservation, ruminant feed, soil contamination, lactic acid bacteria, silage inoculants, silage microbiology, milk contamination

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