Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T11:09:09.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of incorporating rolled barley in autumn-cut ryegrass silage on effluent production, silage fermentation and cattle performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. I. H. Jones ,
R. Jones  and
G. Moseley
D. I. H. Jones
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Welsh Plant Breeding Station, Aberystwyth, Dyfed SY23 3EB, UK
R. Jones
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Welsh Plant Breeding Station, Aberystwyth, Dyfed SY23 3EB, UK
G. Moseley
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, Welsh Plant Breeding Station, Aberystwyth, Dyfed SY23 3EB, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Direct-cut silage was made in mid-October 1985 from established swards of predominantly hybrid ryegrass (Lolium perenne x Lolium multiflorum). The crop contained 161 g dry matter/kg and 94 g soluble carbohydrate/kg and was ensiled in bunker silos with (i) no additive (control), (ii), formic acid (5 litres/t) or (iii) addition of 45 kg rolled barley per tonne of grass in silo.

The inclusion of barley reduced effluent production to 27 litres/t of ensiled grass compared with 51 litres for the control and 60 litres for the formic acid treatment. Losses of DM in effluent were small but total in-silo DM loss was reduced from 25 % for the control to 11% by formic acid and to 13% by inclusion of barley.

DM content of the silage containing barley was 30 g/kg higher than that of the other silages. Silage treated with formic acid contained least ammonia-N, 6% of the total N, compared with 9% in the barley-added silage and 11% in the control. In vivo assessment in sheep gave metabolizable energy values of 98, 10·9 and 11middot;2 MJ/kg for the control, formic and barley silages, respectively; N retention was higher in the formic acid and barley-added silages.

The silages were fed ad libitum to beef cattle for 8 weeks, with a daily feed supplement to the control and formic acid groups to equate barley intakes. Silage DM intake was higher for the barley silage, daily live weight gain per animal was similar for the barley-added and formic acid silages (c. 1 kg), both being higher than the control (0·8 kg).

It was concluded that barley inclusion achieved similar improvements in silage quality, in-silo losses and cattle performance to formic acid treatment but with the additional benefit of markedly reducing effluent production.

Type
Animals
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 115 , Issue 3 , December 1990 , pp. 399 - 408
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bastiman, B. & Altman, J. F. B. (1985). Losses at various stages in silage making. Research and Development in Agriculture 2, 19–25.Google Scholar
Canale, A., Valenta, M. E. & Ciotti, A. (1984). Determination of volatile carboxylic acids (C1–C5) and lactic acid in aqueous acid extracts of silage by high performance liquid chromatography. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 35, 1178–1182.Google Scholar
Dewar, W. A. & Mcdonald, P. (1961). Determination of dry matter in silage by toluene distillation. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 12, 790–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dexter, S. (1961). Water retaining capacity of various silage additives and silage crops under pressure. Agronomy Journal 53, 379–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Done, D. L. (1988). The effect of absorbent additives on silage quality and on effluent production. In Silage Effluent (Eds Stark, B. A. & Wilkinson, J. M.), p. 49. Marlow: Chalcombe PublicationsGoogle Scholar
Dulphy, J. P. & Demarquilly, C. (1975). Incorporation of dry beet pulp in silage; utilisation by dairy cows. Bulletin Technique, Centre de Researches Zooteclmiques et Véteérin-aires de Theix No. 22, 45–52.Google Scholar
Fisher, L. J., Zurcher, P., Shelford, J. A. & Skinner, J. (1981). Quantity and nutrient content of effluent losses from ensiled high moisture grass. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 61, 307–312.Google Scholar
Gordon, F. J. (1981). The effect of wilting of herbage on silage composition and its feeding value for milk production. Animal Production 32, 171–178.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. R. & Mcdonald, P. (1971). Effect of formic acid on the fermentation of grass of low dry matter content. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 22, 157–163.Google Scholar
Jones, D. I. H., Moseley, G. & Jones, R. (1986). The Advantages of rolled barley as a silage additive for beef production. In Science and Quality Beef Production (Ed. Hardcastle, J.), pp. 20–21. London: Agricultural and Food Research Council.Google Scholar
Jones, D. I. H. & Hayward, M. V. (1975). The effect of pepsin pretreatment of herbage on the prediction of dry matter digestibility from solubility in fungal cellulase solutions. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 26, 711–718.Google Scholar
Jones, D. I. H. (1970). The ensiling characteristics of different herbage species and varieties. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 75, 293–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, D. I. H. (1988). The effect of cereal incorporation on the fermentation of spring and autumn cut silages in laboratory silos. Grass and Forage Science 43, 167–172.Google Scholar
Jones, E. E. & Murdoch, J. C. (1954). Polluting character of silage effluent. The Water & Sanitary Engineer, 07/08, 54–56.Google Scholar
Kennedy, S. J. & Moore, C. A. (1988). The use of a silage effluent absorbent. Occasional Research Meeting, British Grassland Society, Aberystwyth, 09 1988, pp. 107–108.Google Scholar
Mcdonald, P., Watson, S. J. & Whittenbury, R. (1966). Principles of ensilage. Zeitschrift fiir Tierphysiologie Tiererndhrung und Futlermittelkunde 21, 103–115.Google Scholar
Miller, W. J. & Clifton, C. M. (1965). Relation of dry matter content in ensiled material and other factors to nutrient losses by seepage. Journal of Dairy Science 48, 917–923.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries And Food (1981). The Analysis of Agricultural Materials. Technical Bulletin, No. 27, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Moseley, G. & Ramanathan, V. (1989). The effect of dry feed additives on the nutritive value of silage. Grass and Forage Science 44, 391–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholson, J. W. G. & Macleod, L. B. (1966). Effect of form of nitrogen fertiliser, a preservative, and a supplement on the value of high moisture grass silage. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 46, 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D. C. & Walker, N. (1979). The use of effluent from grass silage in the diet of finishing pigs. I. Variation in composition of effluents. Animal Feed Science and Technology 4, 263–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, T. A., Olsen, R. A. & Guttormsen, D. M.(1973). Numbers and types of microorganismS in silage and effluent from grass ensiled with different additives. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 23, 110–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Playne, M. J. & Mcdonald, P. (1966). The buffering constituents of herbage and of silage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 17, 264–268.Google Scholar
Purves, D. & Mcdonald, P. (1963). Potential value of silage effluent as a fertiliser. Journal of the British Grassland Society 18, 220–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rydin, C., Nilsson, R. & Toth, L. (1956). Studies on fermentation processes in silage. The effect of various carbohydrates as supplements. Archiv fur Mikrobiologie 23, 376–384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spörndly, R., Burstedt, E. & Lingvall, P. (1982). Grass grain silage for lactating dairy cows. Proceedings of the 9th European Grassland Federation Symposium, Reading, 1982 (Ed. Corrall, A. J.), pp. 247–250. Occasional Symposium of the British Grassland Society, No. 14.Google Scholar
Spörndly, R. (1986). Ensiling of blended grass and grain and its utilisation by dairy cows. Report Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala No. 155.Google Scholar
Stewart, T. A. (1966). An evaluation of barley meal as an additive for autumn made silage. Annual Report on Research on Technical Work of the Ministry of Agriculture for Northern Ireland, p. 108.Google Scholar
Thomas, T. A. (1976). An automated procedure for the determination of soluble carbohydrates in herbage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 28, 639–642.Google Scholar
Varley, J. A. (1966). Automated methods for the determination of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in plant material. Analyst 91, 119–126.Google Scholar
Water Authorities Association (1989). Water Pollution from Farm Waste 1988, England and Wales.Google Scholar
Wilkins, R. J. (1986). Eurowilt: co-ordinated research on the field wilting of grass for silage. In Developments in Silage (Eds Stark, B. A. & Wilkinson, J. M.) pp. 12–19. Marlow: Chalcombe Publications.Google Scholar
Winter, A. L., Whittaker, P. A. & Wilson, R. K. (1987). Microscopic and chemical change during the first 22 days in Italian ryegrass and cocksfoot silages made in laboratory silos. Grass and Forage Science 42 191–196.Google Scholar
Woolford, M. K. (1978). The problem of silage effluent. Herbage Abstracts 48, 397–403.Google Scholar