The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 12 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages
Open accessAbstract
The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri, alone or in combination with Lactobacillus plantarum, on the fermentation, aerobic stability, and ruminal degradability of low dry matter corn and sorghum silages was studied under laboratory conditions. The inoculants were applied at 1 x 10(6) cfu/g. Silages with no additives served as control. After treatment, the chopped forages were ensiled in 1.5-L anaerobic jars. Three jars per treatment were sampled on d 2, 4, 8, 15, and 90. After 90 d of storage, the silages were subjected to an aerobic stability test lasting 5 d, in which CO2 production, as well as chemical and microbiological parameters, was measured to determine the extent of aerobic deterioration. At the end of the ensiling period (d 90), the L. buchneri- and L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages had significantly higher levels of acetic acid than the control and L. plantarum-inoculated silages. Therefore, yeast activity was impaired in the L. buchneri- and L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages. As a result, L. buchneri, alone or in combination with L. plantarum, improved aerobic stability of the low dry matter corn and sorghum silages. The combination of L. buchneri and L. plantarum reduced ammonia N concentrations and fermentation losses in the silages compared with L. buchneri alone. However, L. buchneri, L. plantarum, and a combination of L. buchneri + L. plantarum did not effect in situ rumen dry matter, organic matters, or neutral detergent fiber degradability of the silages. The L. buchneri was very effective in protecting the low dry matter corn and sorghum silages exposed to air under laboratory conditions. The use of L. buchneri, alone or in combination with L. plantarum, as a silage inoculant can improve the aerobic stability of low dry matter corn and sorghum silages by inhibition of yeast activity.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
14 Own result · 7 Own interpretation · 3 Sources not found · 3 No full text of the sources · 3 Own method · 3 No basis given · 1 Partly supported · 1 Not checked yet
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Experiments in laboratory silos indicated that its application at ensiling improved the aerobic stability of the silages (Driehuis et al., 1999a,b;Filya, 2001Filya, , 2003;;Kung and Ranjit, 2001;Filya et al., 2002;Ranjit et al., 2002;Weinberg et al., 2002).”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Driehuis et al., 1999a,b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Filya, 2001, 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Kung and Ranjit, 2001 source
Materials and Methods describes applying additives before ensiling forage in small 20-L experimental silos. Results reports that the intermediate and high L. buchneri doses significantly improved the aerobic stability of barley silage; the lowest dose did not significantly improve it. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After 90 d of ensiling, L. buchneri inoculated silages had higher pH than the control, L. plantarum-, and L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages (P < 0.05).”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ammonia N concentrations were lower in the L. plantarum-and L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages than in the silages Journal of Dairy Science Vol.86, No. 11, 2003 inoculated with L. buchneri (P < 0.05).”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fresh forages had low numbers of lactobacilli, which may be a reason for the slow fermentation.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The same trend was shown in the 4, 8, and 15 d of ensiling.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The drop in pH with time was slower than typically observed in corn and sorghum silages made at more normal DM content.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The control and L. plantarum-inoculated silages contained more residual WSC than the silages inoculated with L. buchneri or L. buchneri + L. plantarum (P < 0.05).”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After 2 d of ensiling, concentrations of acetic acid were higher in L. buchneri-or L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages compared with other silages (P < 0.05).”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the end of the ensiling period (d 90), the L. buchneriand L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages had significantly higher levels of acetic acid than the control and L. plantarum-inoculated silages.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The application rate determined by the manufacturers accurately stated the level of lactic acid bacteria in the inoculant products.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Inoculation with the L. buchneri, L. plantarum, and L. buchneri + L. plantarum did not affect rumen degradability of the silages.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Silages inoculated with L. plantarum or L. buchneri + L. plantarum had higher content of lactic acid than the control and silages inoculated with L. buchneri alone (P < 0.05).”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fresh forages had low numbers of lactobacilli, which may be a reason for the slow fermentation.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The use of L. buchneri, alone or in combination with L. plantarum, as a silage inoculant can improve the aerobic stability of low dry matter corn and sorghum silages by inhibition of yeast activity.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Driehuis et al. (2001) reported that the increase in ammonia N concentration in L. buchneri-inoculated corn silage was associated with the relatively large increase in pH taking place during the storage phase as a result of the high metabolic activity of L. buchneri in these silages.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Driehuis et al. (2001) source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result, L. buchneri, alone or in combination with L. plantarum, improved aerobic stability of the low dry matter corn and sorghum silages.”
- Also stated in: § CONCLUSIONS · plain
“The results of this study show that the L. buchneri, alone or in combination with L. plantarum, can improve the aerobic stability of low-DM corn and sorghum silages.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · boosted
“The results in the current study indicate clearly that inoculation with L. buchneri alone or in combination with a homofermentative LAB improved the aerobic stability of low-DM corn and sorghum silages.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > Abstract
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The application rate determined by the manufacturers accurately stated the level of lactic acid bacteria in the inoculant products.
- Also stated in: § CONCLUSIONS · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The L. buchneri was very effective in protecting the low dry matter corn and sorghum silages exposed to air under laboratory conditions.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > Abstract
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, yeast activity was impaired in the L. buchneri-and L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages.”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“The explanation for the aerobic stability-enhancing effect of L. buchneri is that the activity of yeasts is impaired.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
- It may state two separate claims as one. 14
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
- Probably not a substantial claim. 7
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“L. plantarum-inoculated silages were unstable in the aerobic conditions.This was evident from intensive CO 2 production and development of yeasts.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During fermentation, the pH and WSC levels of the silages were reduced, and concentrations of lactic and acetic acid, ethanol, and ammonia N increased.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The combination of L. buchneri and L. plantarum reduced ammonia N concentrations and fermentation losses in the silages compared with L. buchneri alone.”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“Ammonia N concentrations were lower in the L. plantarum-and L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages than in the silages Journal of Dairy Science Vol.86, No. 11, 2003 inoculated with L. buchneri (P < 0.05).”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“Weight losses were higher in the L. buchneri inoculated silages than the control, L. plantarum-, and L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages (P < 0.05).”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Weight losses were higher in the L. buchneri inoculated silages than the control, L. plantarum-, and L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages (P < 0.05).”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After 90 d of ensiling, yeasts and molds were not detected (< 2.0 cfu/g) in silages inoculated with L. buchneri and L. buchneri + L. plantarum, whereas appreciable numbers of yeasts and molds were detected in the control and the L. plantarum-inoculated silages.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, L. buchneri-and L. buchneri + L. plantarum-inoculated silages inhibited yeast growth and reduced CO 2 production (P < 0.05).”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > RESULTS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The combination of L. buchneri and L. plantarum increased the concentrations of lactic acid and initial rate of acidification of low-DM corn and sorghum silages.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The other data were analyzed as a completely randomized design and subjected to ANOVA by the GLM procedure of SAS (SAS, Inst., Inc., Cary, NC).Differences among means were tested using Tukey's test (Snedecor and Cochran, 1980) and significance was declared at P < 0.05.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > Analyses
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Snedecor and Cochran, 1980
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Driehuis et al. (1999a) showed that yeasts are affected in 2 ways.First, during anaerobic conditions, the survival of yeasts is reduced.As a result, yeasts counts decrease in L. buchneri inoculated silages.Second, during the aerobic exposure, yeast growth is inhibited.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Driehuis et al. (1999a)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri, alone or in combination with Lactobacillus plantarum, on the fermentation, aerobic stability, and ruminal degradability of low dry matter corn and sorghum silages was studied under laboratory conditions.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, such inoculants enhance the aerobic spoilage of wheat, sorghum, and corn silages (Weinberg et al., 1993;Filya et al., 2000;2002a,b) because in these fermentations, not enough VFA are produced to protect the silage against aerobic yeasts and molds (Moon, 1983).”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since microbiological analysis was performed on a single sample per time point, no statistical analysis was possible.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > Analyses
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In this system, CO 2 production, change in pH, and numbers of yeast and molds serve as spoilage indicators.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > MATERIALS AND METHODS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ashbell et al. (1991)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fact that pH dropped slowly even in the inoculated silages suggests that a high buffer capacity occurred in both crops.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > DISCUSSION
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Salawu et al. (2001) found that application of L. buchneri to pea-wheat silage increased the in situ rumen nitrogen degradability, reduced the NDF degradability, and did not affect DM degradability.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Salawu et al. (2001) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Chemical analyses were performed in triplicate and presented on DM basis.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > Analyses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results also show that the combination of L. buchneri and L. plantarum is preferable because the combination accelerates the initial lactic acid fermentation rate, reducing pH and giving lower protein degradation and fermentation losses.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > CONCLUSIONS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Oude Elferink et al. (2001) reported that L. buchneri improved aerobic stability by fermenting lactic acid to acetic acid and 1,2 propanediol.”
§ The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Oude Elferink et al. (2001) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
The application rate determined by the manufacturers accurately stated the level of lactic acid bacteria in the inoculant products.
“The application rate determined by manufacturers stated the level of LAB in the products.”
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Over the past two decades, studies of the heterofermenter L. buchneri have mainly focused on its fermentative metabolites acetic acid and 1,2-propanediol, which increase the stability of silage against deterioration by yeasts and molds when exposed to air12–18.”
From Profiling of metabolome and bacterial community dynamics in ensiled Medicago sativa inoculated without or with Lactobacillus plantarum or Lactobacillus buchneri. (2018) · cites this paper as [14]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The heterofermentative LAB Lactobacillus buchneri was shown to inhibit yeast and mold growth by producing high concentrations of acetic acid12–14.”
In the citing paper
“In order to overcome this problem, heterofermentative LAB, mainly Lentilactobacillus buchneri subsp. buchneri, have been used for more than two decades so far for silage preservation (Filya, 2003; Schmidt et al., 2009).”
From Potential of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolated From Different Forages as Silage Inoculants for Improving Fermentation Quality and Aerobic Stability (2020) · cites this paper as Filya, 2003
In the citing paper
“In agreement, Weinberg et al. (2002), Filya (2003), and Hu et al. (2009) also found increases in the lactate concentration of corn silage inoculated with L. buchneri and L. plantarum and increases in the acetic acid concentration of corn silage inoculated with L. buchneri alone or combined with L. plantarum.”
From Effects of feeding corn silage inoculated with microbial additives on the ruminal fermentation, microbial protein yield, and growth performance of lambs1 (2014) · cites this paper as Filya, 2003
Citations
Cites
Official Methods of Analysis of
Helrick, K. (1980) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac50052a726 · Cited by 59,351
Colorimetric Method for Determination of Sugars and Related Substances
DuBois, M., Gilles, K. A., Hamilton, J. K., Rebers, P. A., & Smith, F. (1956) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac60111a017 · Cited by 52,269
Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B., & Lewis, B. A. (1991) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(91)78551-2 · Cited by 28,658
Snedecor, G. W., & Cochran, W. G. (1967) · Cited by 6,573
Kobayashi, S., Oh, S.-I., & Altan, T. (1989) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195044027.003.0008 · Cited by 1,687
McDonald, P. (1981) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,473
A study of artificial fibre bag technique for determining the dig estibility of feeds in the rumen
Mehrez, A., & Ørskov, E. R. (1977) · The Journal of Agricultural Science · doi:10.1017/s0021859600037321 · Cited by 791
Anaerobic Conversion of Lactic Acid to Acetic Acid and 1,2-Propanediol by Lactobacillus buchneri
Oude Elferink, S. J. W. H., Krooneman, J., Gottschal, J. C., Spoelstra, S. F., Faber, F., & Driehuis, F. (2001) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.67.1.125-132.2001 · Cited by 685
The detrimental effects of air on silage
Woolford, M. K. (1990) · Journal of Applied Bacteriology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.1990.tb02554.x · Cited by 392
Moon, N. J. (1983) · Journal of Applied Bacteriology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.1983.tb01685.x · Cited by 374
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Ashbell, 1991, A simple system to study the aerobic deterioration of silages, Can. Agric. Eng., 33, 171
- Muck, R. E. 1996. A lactic acid bacteria strain to improve aerobic stability of silages. Pages 42–43 in U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center 1996 Research Summaries. Madison, WI.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The aerobic stability of silage: key findings and recent developments
Wilkinson, J. M., & Davies, D. R. (2013) · Grass and Forage Science · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2494.2012.00891.x · Cited by 489
Kleinschmit, D. H., & Kung, L. (2006) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(06)72444-4 · Cited by 356
“Filya, 2003 33 Corn silage Untreated 90 11A44 1.0 × 10”
InfluentialImportance of lactobacilli in food and feed biotechnology
Giraffa, G., Chanishvili, N., & Widyastuti, Y. (2010) · Research in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.resmic.2010.03.001 · Cited by 341
Hu, W., Schmidt, R. J., McDonell, E. E., Klingerman, C. M., & Kung, L. (2009) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2008-1788 · Cited by 211
“N in grass and low DM corn and sorghum silages (Driehuis et al., 2001; Filya, 2003b).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialGuo, X. S., Ke, W. C., Ding, W. R., Ding, L. M., Xu, D. M., Wang, W. W., Zhang, P., & Yang, F. Y. (2018) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-18348-0 · Cited by 196
Metadata
- Authors
- Filya, I.
- Affiliations
- Bursa Uludağ Üni̇versi̇tesi̇ (TR)
- Corresponding author
- Filya, I.
- ORCID
- Filya, I.
- Venue
- Journal of Dairy Science
- Publisher
- American Dairy Science Association
- Published
- 2003-11
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3575-3581
- ISSN
- 0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2061566556
- Semantic Scholar
- 8a7c2ea138a4a1b3a1ea0c4384cdf41128877b31
- Cited by
- 287
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 13.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Bursa Uludag University - AVESIS (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › 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 › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
- Keywords
- Lactobacillus buchneri, Lactobacillus plantarum, silage inoculants, aerobic stability, corn silage, sorghum silage, rumen degradability, yeast activity, acetic acid, ammonia nitrogen, silage fermentation, in situ rumen degradability
- MeSH terms
- Acetates, Aerobiosis, Animals, Animal Feed, Carbon Dioxide, Cattle, Zea mays, Dietary Fiber, Fermentation, Food Handling, Food Microbiology, Food Preservation, Lactobacillus, Oxygen, Rumen, Silage, Time Factors, Yeasts, Colony Count, Microbial, Coculture Techniques, Sorghum
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
