CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 69Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyBiofuel production and bioconversion

Conservation, fiber digestibility, and nutritive value of corn harvested at 2 cutting heights and ensiled with fibrolytic enzymes, either alone or with a ferulic acid esterase-producing inoculant

Open access
Lynch, J.P., Baah, J., Beauchemin, K.A.·2015·Journal of Dairy Science
DOI 10.3168/jds.2014-8768
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the effects of the use of a fibrolytic enzyme product, applied at ensiling either alone or in combination with a ferulic acid esterase-producing bacterial additive, on the chemical composition, conservation characteristics, and in vitro degradability of corn silage harvested at either conventional or high cutting height. Triplicate samples of corn were harvested to leave stubble of either a conventional (15cm; NC) or high (45cm; HC) height above ground. Sub-samples of chopped herbage were ensiled untreated or with a fibrolytic enzyme product containing xylanases and cellulases applied either alone (ENZ) or in combination with a ferulic acid esterase-producing silage inoculant (ENZ+FAEI). The fibrolytic enzyme treatment was applied at 2mL of enzyme product/kg of herbage dry matter (DM), and the inoculant was applied at 1.3×10(5) cfu/g of fresh herbage. Samples were packed into laboratory-scale silos, stored for 7, 28, or 70 d, and analyzed for fermentation characteristics, and samples ensiled for 70 d were also analyzed for DM losses, chemical composition, and in vitro ruminal degradability. After 70 d of ensiling, the fermentation characteristics of corn silages were generally unaffected by cutting height, whereas the neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber, and ash concentrations were lower and the starch concentration greater for silages made with crops harvested at HC compared with NC. After 70 d of ensiling, the acetic acid, ethanol concentrations, and the number of yeasts were greater, and the pH and neutral detergent fiber concentrations were lower, in silages produced using ENZ or ENZ+FAEI than the untreated silages, whereas ENZ+FAEI silages also incurred higher DM losses. No effect of additive treatment was observed on in vitro degradability indices after 48h ruminal incubation. The use of a fibrolytic enzyme product, either alone or in combination with a ferulic acid esterase-producing inoculant, at ensiling did not improve corn silage fermentation or its nutritive value and resulted in some negative effects on these parameters. The effects of using a fibrolytic enzyme product at ensiling, either alone or in combination with a ferulic acid esterase-producing inoculant, did not differ between corn harvested at either NC or HC. Silage made from HC had a greater starch content and lower fiber content than NC silage, whereas cutting height did not affect the in vitro digestibility indices.

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.2014-8768

Cites

34 of 34 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?

  • The enzyme-treated corn silage also exhibited decreased DM recovery and higher yeast counts, with no indication that the nutritive value of corn silage was improved.

    “However, the enzyme-treated silage also exhibited decreased DM recovery and higher yeast counts, with no indication that the nutritive value of corn silage was improved.”

    From Silage review: Recent advances and future uses of silage additives (2018) · cites this paper as Lynch et al. (2015)

    The Fermentation–Additive Treatment section reports higher yeast counts for both enzyme-only (ENZ) and enzyme-plus-inoculant (ENZ+FAEI) silages. The Conclusions report no improvement in nutritive value. But Table 5 shows significantly greater DM loss only for ENZ+FAEI, not ENZ alone, so decreased DM recovery is not established for enzyme treatment alone. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Other studies have also failed to measure any improvement in NDF digestibility of either alfalfa or corn silage ensiled with this inoculant.

    “However, other studies have also failed to measure any improvement in NDF digestibility of either alfalfa (Lynch et al., 2014) or corn silage (Lynch et al., 2015) ensiled with this inoculant.”

    From Silage review: Recent advances and future uses of silage additives (2018) · cites this paper as Lynch et al., 2015

  • Cellulase and xylanase added to corn forage before ensiling in combination with a ferulic acid esterase-producing (FAE) silage inoculant resulted in a lower pH and higher WSC than the control silage after 70 d of ensiling.

    “Lynch et al. (2015) added cellulase and xylanase to corn forage before ensiling alone and in combination with a ferulic acid esterase-producing (FAE) silage inoculant and found that the combination resulted in a lower pH and higher WSC than the control silage after 70 d of ensiling.”

    From Silage review: Recent advances and future uses of silage additives (2018) · cites this paper as Lynch et al. (2015)

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. [25]25. NRC. 2001. Nutrient requirements of Dairy Cattle. 7th ed. National Academic Press, Washington, DC.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lynch, J. P., Baah, J., & Beauchemin, K. A.
Affiliations
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (CA)
Corresponding author
Beauchemin, K.A.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Dairy Science
Publisher
American Dairy Science Association
Published
2015-02
Volume
98
Issue
2
Pages
1214-1224
ISSN
0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3168/jds.2014-8768
OpenAlex
W2152483471
Cited by
69
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3
FWCI
2.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Alberta Livestock and Meat Agency Ltd (LOI 2012CO13R)
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
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Biofuel production and bioconversion
Keywords
corn silage, cutting height, fibrolytic enzymes, xylanase, cellulase, ferulic acid esterase, silage inoculants, silage fermentation, fiber digestibility, nutritional value, dry matter loss, neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber, acetic acid, ethanol, yeast, silage additives
MeSH terms
Animals, Bacteria, Carboxylic Ester Hydrolases, Zea mays, Dietary Fiber, Digestion, Fermentation, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Nutritive Value, Silage, Starch, Yeasts, Endo-1,4-beta Xylanases, Cellulases

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