CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 145Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyProbiotics and Fermented FoodsAnimal Nutrition and Physiology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Identification and Characterization of Enterococcus Species Isolated from Forage Crops and Their Influence on Silage Fermentation

Open access
Cai, Yimin·1999·Journal of Dairy Science
DOI 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(99)75498-6
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Forty-eight strains of lactic acid bacteria were isolated from forage crops, and their identification, characterization and influence on silage fermentation were studied. All isolates were Gram-positive, short-chain-forming, catalase-negative, and facultatively anaerobic cocci that did not produce gas from glucose, only formed L-lactic acid, and were able to grow at pH 9.6%, in 6.5% NaCl, or with 40% bile, but not below pH 4.5. These isolates were commonly isolated from forage crops, and they were divided into four groups (A, B, C, and D) according to sugar fermentation characteristics. Selected strains of FA 5, FA 27, FA 45, and FA 57 were identified as Enterococcus hirae, E. faecalis, E. casseliflavus, and E. mundtii, respectively, on the basis of DNA-DNA homology, Strains FA 5, FA 27, FA 45, and FA 57 and two strains from commercial inoculants, LC 10 (Lactobacillus casei) and LP 15 (L. plantarum), were used as additives to alfalfa and guinea grass silages. Alphalfa and guinea grass silages inoculated with LC 10, LP 15, FA 5 + LC 10, and FA 5 + LP 15-treatments in alfalfa and guinea grass silages had significantly lower pH values, contents of butyric acid and ammonia nitrogen, gas production, and dry matter losses compared with the control silage after 60 d of fermentation. However, the E. hirae FA 5, E. faecalis FA 27, E. casseliflavus FA 45, and E. mundtii FA 57-inoculated silages gave similar values to the control in both types of silage. The FA 27 + LC 10 and FA 27 + LP 15-inoculated silages did not differ in fermentation quality from LC 10 and LP 15-inoculated silages alone. The results confirmed that Enterococcus species were not able to improve silage quality.

Overview

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.s0022-0302(99)75498-6

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 145

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Cai, Y.
Corresponding author
Cai, Yimin
ORCID
Cai, Yimin
Venue
Journal of Dairy Science
Publisher
American Dairy Science Association
Published
1999-11
Volume
82
Issue
11
Pages
2466-2471
ISSN
0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(99)75498-6
OpenAlex
W2064269733
Cited by
145
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
Keywords
Enterococcus, silage fermentation, forage crops, Enterococcus hirae, Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus casseliflavus, Enterococcus mundtii, silage inoculants, alfalfa silage, Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus plantarum, silage quality, butyrate, ammonia nitrogen, dry matter loss
MeSH terms
Bacteria, Anaerobic, Base Composition, Catalase, DNA, Bacterial, Fermentation, Gram-Positive Bacteria, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Nucleic Acid Hybridization, Phenotype, Silage, Enterococcus, Carbohydrate Metabolism

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