Effect of bacterial inoculant and acetic acid on chemical compositions, fermentation characteristics and digestibility of tomato pomace and pumpkin waste silage in ruminant nutrition

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Azadshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Azadshahr, Iran. Azadshahr, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Gonbadkavos University, Gonbadkavos, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Azadshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Azadshahr, Iran.

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Considering the characteristics of tomato pomace, which contains high amounts of crude protein, as well as pumpkin waste (including skin and fruit), which contain high amounts of soluble carbohydrates as an energy source, the combination of these two is better for preparing silage. It can support the fermentation process in silage. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of the use of bacterial and acidic additives on chemical acids, fermentation properties and digestibility in tomato pomace silage and pumpkin waste.
Material and Methods:Representative of samples were packed manually, in triplicate into plastic bags and were stored at ambient temperature and allowed to ensiled for 90 days. The following treatments were applied to the forage samples: 1) tomato pomace and pumpkin waste silage mix (50:50), without any additives (control), 2) control + LAB made inoculant (8×109 CFU/ml), 3) control + organic acid and 4) control + organic acid + LAB made inoculants.
Results:The results showed that there was a significant effect between the treatments in terms of dry matter in 45 days (p<0.05), The highest was observed on the 45th day in the 24.38 acid treatment.
There was no significant effect between the treatments in terms of crude protein, neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber (p>0.05). But, as days passed after ensiling crude protein, neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber decreased. A significant difference was observed in the amount of ammonia nitrogen between the experimental treatments 45 days after ensiling (P<0.05), which was the highest on the 90th day of 2.50 in the bacterial treatment and the lowest on the 1st day in the acid treatment of 0.20. The pH value of different silages during the time after ensiling was not affected by the experimental treatments. The lowest pH value (3.85) was observed on the 90th day after ensiling in silage with added bacteria. As the time after ensiling increased, the pH decreased. Flake point was significant in all treatments and all days (p<0.05). The lowest was observed on the 1st day of 49.08 in the control treatment and the highest was observed on the 45th day of 93.86 in the bacterial treatment. There was no significant effect between treatments in terms of dry and organic matter digestibility, parsing factor, microbial mass production and gas production efficiency (p>0.05). However, the highest and lowest digestibility of dry and organic matter were related to treatments 2 and 1, respectively. In terms of microbial protein production efficiency, the difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). The pH value at the end of the period was significant (p<0.05), and all the treatments had lower pH compared to the control. Also, the amount of ammonia nitrogen at the end of the period was significant (p<0.05) and the highest ammonia nitrogen belonged to the control.
Conclusion: In general, the results showed that the use of different additives did not have a significant effect on the nutritional value of the mixed silage of tomato pomace and pumpkin waste compared to the control treatment. Considering the cost of adding additives, as well as having information and technical knowledge regarding additives, it is recommended to consume tomato pomace and pumpkin waste without adding any additives.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Adesogan, A.T., Krueger, N., Salawu, M.B., Dean, D.B. and Staples, C.R. 2004. The influence of treatment with dual purpose bacterial incubation soluble carbohydrates on the fermentation and aerobic stability of Bermuda grass. Journal of Dairy Science, 87: 3407–3416.
Aiubifar, M., Gharehbash, A.M, Bayat. and Farivar, F. 1400. Effect of different additives on chemical composition, fermentation parameters, digestibility and gas production of Gundelia tournefortii silage. Journal of Ruminant Research, 9(3), 1-24.
Alikhani, M., Alamooti, A.A., Ghorbani, G.R. and Sadeghi, N. 2005. Effect molasses, urea. and bacterial inoculation on the chemical composition and degradability of dry matter of ensiled sunflower. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Techniques and Natural Resources, 3: 171– 182.
Bampidis, V. A. and Robinson, P. H. 2006. Citrus by-products as ruminant feeds: A review. Journal of Animal Feed Science and Technology, 128:175-217.
Barzamini, H. 2014. The effect of adding sugar beet pomace and dry citrus pomace on chemical composition. Fermentation properties. Gas production and digestibility of tomato pomace silage. Master's thesis in animal nutrition. Faculty of Agriculture, Gonbad Kavos University.
Baytok, E., Aksu, T., Karsli, M.A. and Muruz, M. 2005. The effects of formic acid, molasses and inoculants as silage additives on corn silage composition and ruminal fermentation characteristics in sheep. Turk Journal of Veterinary Animal Science, 29: 469-474.
Blummel, M., Steingass, H. and Becker, K. 1997. The relationship between in vitro gas production, in vitro microbial biomas yield and 15N incorporation and its implications for the prediction of voluntary feed intake of roughages. British Journal of Nutrition, 77: 911- 921.
Broderick, G.A. and Kang, J.H. 1980. Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and total amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro media. Journal of Dairy Science, 63: 64–75.
Buxton, R., Muck, R. E. and Harrison, F. 2003. Silage Science and Technology. American society
of agronomy. Madison. Wiscosin. USA.
Dehghani, M.R., Weisbjerg, M.R., Hvelplund, T. and Kristensen, N.B. 2012. Effect of enzyme addition to forage at ensiling on silage chemical composition and NDF degradation characteristics. Livestock. Science, 150: 51-58.
Ergül, M. 1988. Replacement of fishmeal by brewer's yeast in broiler rations with high levels of cottonseed meal and sunflower seed meal. Landbauforschung Vlkenrode, 38:211-219.
Filya, I., Ashbell, G., Hen, Y. and Weinberg, Z.G. 2000. The effect of bacterial inoculants on the fermentation and aerobic stability of whole crop wheat silage. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 88(1): 39-46.
Flork, S., Purwin, C., Mainakowski, D., Stanek, M. and Tredowicz, M. 2004. The influence of formic acid additives A. Use of phytogenic products feed on the quality of silage from different plant material. Journal of Veterinary Ir zootechnike, 26: 1392- 2130.
Gallo, J., Fernye, C., Orosz, S., Katona, K. and Szemethy, L. 2017. Tomato pomace silage as apotential new supplementary food for game species. Journal of Agriculture and Food Science, 26: 80-90.
Grasser, L. A., Fadel, J. G., Garnett, I. and DePeters, E. J. 1995. Quantity and economic importance of nine selected by products used in California dairy rations. Journal of Dairy Science, 78:962–971.
Hassanat, F., Gervais, R. and Benchaar, C. 2017. Methane production, ruminal fermentation characteristics, nutrient digestibility, nitrogen excretion, and milk production of dairy cows fed conventional or brown midrib corn silage. Journal of Dairy Science. 4: 2625-2636.
Higginbotham, G.E., DePeters, E.J. and Muellr, S.C. 1996. Effect of propionic acid producing bacteria on corn silage fermentation. Journal of Professional Animal Science, 12:176-180.
Hristov, A.N. and McAllister, T.A. 2002. Effect of inoculants on whole-crop barley silage fermentation and dry matter disappearance in situ. Journal of Animal Science, 80:510–516.
Keady, T.W.J. and Murphy, J.J. 1996. Effects of inoculant treatment on ryegrass silage fermentation, digestibility, rumen fermentation, intake and performance of lactating dairy cattle. Grass Forage Science, 51:232-241.
Keady, T.W.J. and Steen, R.W.J. 1995. The effects of treating low dry-matter, low dry –mater, and low digestibility grass with bacterial inoculants on the intake and performance of beef cattle, and studies on its mode of action. Grass Forage Science, 50:217-226.
Kent, B., Arambel, A. and Winsryg, J.L. 1988. Effect of bacterial inoculant on alfalfa haylage: ensilag characteristics and milk production response when fed to dairy cows in early lactation. Journal Dairy Scienc, 71: 2457-2561.
Keramandli, T., Gharehbash, A.M., Bayat Koohsar, J. and Mohajer, M. 2014. Investigating the nutritional value (chemical compounds, digestibility and gas production) of pumpkin and watermelon waste silage. Master's thesis, Gonbad Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources. 73.
Karimi.1990. Cultivation and Improvement of Fodder Plants. Tehran University Publications, Iran 428 pp.
Kim, S.C. and Adesogan, A.T. 2006. Influence of ensiling temperature, simulated rainfall, and delayed sealing on fermentation characteristics and aerobic stability of corn silage. Journal of Dairy Science.,89: 3122-3132.
Kizilsimsek, M., Schmidt, R.J. and Kung, L. 2007. Effects of a mixture of lactic Acid bacteria applied as a freeze-dried or fresh culture on the fermentation of alfalfa silage. Journal of Dairy Science, 90:5698-5705.
Kleinschmit, D.H .and Kung, J.R.L. 2006. The effects of lactobacillus buchneri 40788 and pediococcus pentosaceus R1094 on the fermentation of corn silage. Journal of Dairy Science, 89:3999-4004.
Kung, J.R., Myers, C.L., nylon, J.M., Taylor, C.C., Mills, J.A. and Whiter, A.G. 2004. The effects of buffered propionic acid-based additives alone or combined with microbial inoculation on the fermentation of the high moisture corn and whole-crop barley. Journal of Dairy Science, 87: 1310-1316.
Kung, J.R., Robinson, J.R., Ranjit, N.K., Chen, J.H., Golt, C.M. and Pesek, J.D. 2000. Microbial population fermentation end products and aerobic stability of corn silage treated with ammonia or a propionic acid based preservative. Journal of Dairy Science, 83: 227-234.
McAllister, T.A., Reniuk, R., Mir, Z., Mir, P., Selinger, S.B. and Cheng, K.J. 1998. Inoculants for ahfalfa silage: effects on aerobic stability, digestibility and the growth performance of feedlot streets. Journal of Livestock Production Science, 53: 171- 181.
McDonald, P., Henderson, A.R. and Heron, S.J.E. 1991. The Biochemistry of Silage (2nded), Chalcombe, U.K. 184p.
Menke, K.H., Raab, L., Salewski, A., Steingass, H., Fritz, D. and Schneider, W. 1979. The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feeding stuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. Journal of Agriculture Science, 93: 217-222.
Miron, J., Ephraim, Z., Dgnit, S. and Gabriel, A. 2005. Yield, composition, in vitro digestibility of new forage sorghum varieties and their ensilage characteristics. Animal Feed Science and Tecnology, 120: 17-32.
Mokhtarpur, G. and Abbasi, A. 1994. Selection of the best silage preparation method of pumpkin waste, Final Report of the Research Project, Natural Resources Research Center of Golestan Province.

Muck, R.E. 1988. Factors influencing silage quality and their implications for management. Journal of Dairy Science, 71(11), 2992-3003.

Muck, R.E. 2010. Silage Additives and Management Issues. Idaho Alfalfa and Forage Conference Proceedings, Burley, ID, Feb. 16-17. p. 49-55.
Muck, R.E. and Kung, L.J.R. 2007. Silage Production. Pages 617-633 in Forages: The Science of Grassland Agriculture. Vol. II. 6th ed. R. F.
Muck, R.E. and Kung, L.Jr. 1997. Effects of silage additives on ensiling. Pro. Form the Silage: Field to Feedbunk North American Conference. 99: 187-199.
Mussatto, S. I., Dragone, G. and Roberto, I. C. 2006. Brewer’s spent grain: generation, characteristics and potential applications. Journal of Cereal Science, 43(1), 1-14.
Naghel, G.A. and Brodrick, J.H. 1992.  Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and total amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro media. Journal of Dairy Science, 6: 64-75.
Niderkorn, V. and Baumont, R. 2009. Associative effects between forages on feed intake and digestion in ruminants. Animal Journal, 3:7, 951-960, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731109004261.
Saghebi, M., Khalil Vandi Behroozyar, H., Pirmohammadi, R. and Donyadoust-Chelan, M. 2023. Evaluation the effects of biological processing of wheat straw by Aspergillus oryzae on rumen fermentation parameters and fiber degradability in ruminants. Journal of Ruminant Research, (4) 10, 1-20. DOI: 10.22069/ejrr.2022.19674.1818.
Slottner, D. and Bertilsson, J. 2006. Effect of ensiling technology on protein degradation during ensiling. Journal of Animal Feed Science and Technology, 127: 101-111.
Theodorou, M.K., Williams, B.A., Dhanoa, M.S., McAllan, A.B. and France, J. 1994. A simple gas production method using a pressure transducer to determine the fermentation kinetics of ruminant feeds. Journal of Animal Feed Science and Tecnology, 48 (3-4): 185-197.
Ulger, I., Kaliber, M., Ayahan, T. and Küçük, O. 2018. Chemical composition, organic matter digestibility and energy content of apple pomace silage and its combination with corn plant, sugar beet pulp and pumpkin pulp. South African Journal of Animal Science, 48:497–503.
Vahedi,A.,Ali Arabi,H.and Zamani,p.2011. Investigating the possibility of ensiling pumpkin residue using a mixture of bran straw and urea. 5th Congress of Animal Sciences of Iran Isfahan University of Technology.
Xing, L., Chen, L.J. and Han, L.J. 2009. The effect of an inoculant and enzymes on fermentation and nutritive value of sorghum straw silages. Bioresource­ Technology, 100: 488-491.
Journal of Ruminant Research
Volume 12, Issue 1
April 2024
Pages 17-34

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics