Premium
An evaluation of three bacterial inoculants and formic acid as additives for first harvest grass
Author(s) -
KENNEDY S. J.
Publication year - 1990
Publication title -
grass and forage science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.716
H-Index - 56
eISSN - 1365-2494
pISSN - 0142-5242
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2494.1990.tb01951.x
Subject(s) - silage , microbial inoculant , formic acid , lactic acid , dry matter , zoology , chemistry , food science , silo , agronomy , biology , horticulture , biochemistry , bacteria , inoculation , genetics
An experiment was carried out during 1984 to study the effect of treating grass at ensiling with three commercially available inoculant‐type additives (H/M Inoculant, Grass Sile and Siron), formic acid (850 g kg −1 ; Add‐F) or no additive on grass preservation, in‐silo loss, intake and animal performance. Primary growth grass ensiled from 28–29 May into concrete‐walled covered silos was of high dry matter (DM, 234 g kg −1 ), water‐soluble carbohydrate content (WSC. 212 g kg DM −1 ) and digestibility (MADF, 250 g kg DM −1 ). The untreated silage displayed good preservation and with the exception of the Sirontreated silage which showed significantly lower buffering capacity (Be) and volatile fatty acid (VFA) contents than the untreated silage, the application of inoculant‐type additives did not improve silage preservation or decrease in‐silo DM losses. The formic acid‐treated silage displayed significantly lower Be, water‐soluble carbohydrate, ash, ammonia nitrogen (g kg total N −1 ) and lactate contents than the untreated silage. After a 133 d storage period, silages were offered to finishing beef cattle for an 84‐d period. Cattle offered the silages displayed similar and non‐significant daily DM intakes, daily liveweight gains, dressing proportions and daily carcass gains. From this experiment it appears unlikely that any of the additives evaluated will improve animal performance relative to a well‐preserved untreated silage.