Cited by 100Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food

Effect of applying molasses or inoculants containing homofermentative or heterofermentative bacteria at two rates on the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage

Open access
Huisden, C.M., Adesogan, A.T., Kim, S.C., Ososanya, T.·2009·Journal of Dairy Science

Abstract

This study determined how the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage are affected by treatment with molasses or 2 dual-purpose inoculants applied at or above the recommended rate. Corn forage (DeKalb 69-70) was harvested at 39% dry matter (DM) and ensiled after treatment with no additives (control, CON), molasses (MOL), Buchneri 500 inoculant, or Pioneer 11C33 inoculant. Molasses was applied at 3% of forage DM. Buchneri 500 was applied at the recommended rate of 8 mg/kg fresh forage to supply 1 x 10(5) cfu/g of Pediococcus pentosaceus 12455 and 4 x 10(5) cfu/g of Lactobacillus buchneri 40788 (BB) or at twice the recommended rate (DBB). Pioneer 11C33 inoculant was applied at the recommended rate of 1.1 mg/kg fresh forage to supply 1 x 10(5) cfu/g of a mixture of Lactobacillus plantarum, L. buchneri, and Enteroccocus faecium (PN) or at twice the recommended rate (DPN). Each treatment was applied in quadruplicate and the treated forages were ensiled within 20-L mini silos for 135 d at 18 to 35 degrees C. Molasses-treated silages had greater ash and starch concentrations than CON silages and greater lactate and ethanol concentrations than other silages. Like CON silages, MOL silages had high yeast counts (>10(5) cfu/g); consequently, they deteriorated within 30 h as shown by temperature increase. Inoculant-treated silages had lower lactate to acetate ratios than CON or MOL silages largely because they had greater acetate concentrations. Consequently, all inoculant-treated silages had fewer yeasts (<10(5) cfu/g) and were more stable (>30 h) than CON and MOL silages. When applied at recommended rates, PN and BB had similar effects on silage chemical composition, fermentation, fungal counts, and aerobic stability, except for a lower lactate concentration in PN silages. Concentrations of VFA, and NH(3)-N, pH, and extent of aerobic stability were similar for PN, DPN, BB, and DBB silages. However, lactate concentration was greater in DPN than in PN. In conclusion, MOL application increased ethanol and lactate concentration and did not improve aerobic stability. Both dual-purpose inoculants made the fermentation more heterolactic and thereby improved the aerobic stability of corn silage. Doubling the rate of application of either inoculant did not further improve fermentation or aerobic stability.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3168/jds.2008-1546

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 25 · Cited by 100

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [1]1. Adesogan, A. T. 2006. Factors affecting corn silage quality in hot humid climates. Pages 108-127 in Proc. 17th Florida Rumin. Nutr. Conf., Gainesville, FL.
  2. [10]10. Driehuis, F., S. F. Spoelstra, S. C. J. Cole, and R. Morgan. 1996. Improving aerobic stability by inoculation with Lactobacillus buchneri. Pages 106-107 in Proc. XI Int. Silage Conf. Univ. Wales, Aberystwyth, UK.
  3. [26]26. Van Soest, P. J., R. H. Wine, and L. A. Moore. 1966. Estimation of the free digestibility of forages by the in vitro digestion of cell wails. Page 438 in Proc. 10th Intl. Grassl. Congr., Helsinki, Finland.

Authors
Huisden, C. M., Adesogan, A. T., Kim, S. C., & Ososanya, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of Ibadan (NG)
Corresponding author
Adesogan, A.T.
Venue
Journal of Dairy Science
Published
2009-02
Volume
92
Issue
2
Pages
690-697
ISSN
0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2079761032
Cited by
100
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
FWCI
10.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Southeast Milk Check-Off
  • Lallemand Animal Nutrition
  • Pioneer Hi-Bred, a DuPont Business
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
corn silage, molasses, silage inoculants, homofermentative bacteria, heterofermentative bacteria, Lactobacillus buchneri, Pediococcus pentosaceus, Lactobacillus plantarum, Enterococcus faecium, aerobic stability, silage fermentation, yeast count, volatile fatty acids, ammonia nitrogen, silage additives
MeSH terms
Aerobiosis, Zea mays, Fermentation, Food Microbiology, Gram-Positive Bacteria, Molasses, Silage, Colony Count, Microbial

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