Cited by 55Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyCrop Yield and Soil Fertility

Effects of an exogenous protease on the fermentation and nutritive value of corn silage harvested at different dry matter contents and ensiled for various lengths of time

Open access
Windle, M.C., Walker, N., Kung, L.·2014·Journal of Dairy Science

Abstract

The objective of this experiment was to evaluate the effects of adding an experimental protease to corn plants harvested at different maturities on silage fermentation and in vitro ruminal starch digestibility (IVSD). Corn plants were harvested at maturities resulting in plants with 31 or 40% dry matter (DM). Plants were chopped, kernel processed, and treated with (1) only a 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 5.5, 5% vol/wt of fresh forage), (2) buffer with protease to obtain a final concentration of 20mg of protease/kg of wet forage, and (3) buffer with protease to obtain a final concentration of 2,000 mg of protease/kg of wet forage. Treated forages (about 500 g) were ensiled in nylon-polyethylene pouches and stored between 21 and 23°C for 0, 45, 90, and 150 d. Data were analyzed as a 2 × 3 × 4 factorial arrangement of treatments, with the main effects of harvest DM, dose of protease, days of ensiling, and their interactions. The treatment with the highest dose of protease resulted in more robust fermentations across harvest DM with higher concentrations of lactic and acetic acids compared with untreated silage. Concentrations of soluble protein (% of crude protein) increased with time of ensiling, regardless of DM content at harvest. However, averaged over both harvest DM contents, it increased by 37% for silages treated with the high dose of protease compared with an average 11% increase for untreated silages and silage treated with the low dose of protease, between d 0 and 45. Averaged over both harvest DM contents, the concentration of soluble protein peaked in silages treated with the high dose of protease after 45 d of ensiling, whereas it peaked at d 90 in untreated silages and silage treated with the low dose of protease. Similar changes occurred in the concentration of NH3-N due to length of ensiling and treatment with protease. In fresh forages, the concentration of starch for early- and late-harvested forages was similar, but IVSD was lower in the latter. After 45 d of ensiling, IVSD was highest in both early- and late-harvested silages that were treated with the high level of protease. After 150 d of ensiling, IVSD was similar among silages treated with protease, regardless of DM at harvest. Treating corn plants with a high dose of an experimental protease at harvest accelerated proteolysis during ensiling, resulting in corn silages with levels of IVSD after 45 d of ensiling that were only obtained in untreated corn silages after 150 d of ensiling.

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.2013-7586

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

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?

  • Several studies have shown that acidic proteases applied at ensiling are able to increase proteolytic activity and improve ruminal starch digestion.

    “Several studies (Young et al., 2012;Windle et al., 2014) have shown that acidic proteases applied at ensiling are able to increase proteolytic activity and improve ruminal starch digestion.”

    From Silage review: Recent advances and future uses of silage additives (2018) · cites this paper as Windle et al., 2014

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [24]24. Snedecor, G. W., and W. G. Cochran. 1980. Statistical Methods. 6th ed. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Windle, M. C., Walker, N., & Kung, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Delaware (US)
  • AB Vista (United Kingdom) (GB)
Corresponding author
Kung, L.
Venue
Journal of Dairy Science
Published
2014-05
Volume
97
Issue
5
Pages
3053-3060
ISSN
0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2171288472
Cited by
55
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
5.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
AB Vista
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 › Agronomy and Crop Science › Crop Yield and Soil Fertility
Keywords
corn silage, exogenous protease, silage fermentation, harvest maturity, dry matter content, soluble protein, ammonia nitrogen, lactic acid, acetic acid, ensiling time, forage quality, rumen fermentation, silage additives, dairy cattle feed
MeSH terms
Animals, Zea mays, Fermentation, Food Analysis, Nutritive Value, Endopeptidases, Silage, Starch, Time Factors

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