首页|期刊导航|饲料研究|基于隶属函数法分析不同类型添加剂对饲草谷子青贮品质的影响

基于隶属函数法分析不同类型添加剂对饲草谷子青贮品质的影响OA

Effects of different types of additives on silage quality of forage foxtail millet based on membership function analysis

中文摘要英文摘要

试验旨在探究不同类型添加剂对饲草谷子青贮品质的影响.以草6号、草28号、张青谷5号3种饲草谷子为研究对象,每个品种分别设5个处理组,对照组(CK组)不做任何处理,试验组分别添加0.1%EM复合菌剂(EM组)、0.1%纤维素酶(C组)、0.5%尿素(U组)和0.1%纤维素酶+0.5%尿素(CU组),每组设3个重复.发酵60 d后,测定各组青贮的营养品质.结果显示,各组青贮饲料的感官评分均为良好.与CK组相比,各品种EM组pH值降低,而U组pH值提高.各品种CU组粗蛋白(CP)含量最高,酸性洗涤纤维(ADF)和中性洗涤纤维(NDF)含量最低.草6号U组、草28号EM组可溶性碳水化合物(WSC)含量显著低于CK组(P<0.05).隶属函数综合评价表明,草6号和草28号CU组得分最高,分别为3.967和5.355,整体排名分别为第1和第3;而张青谷5号的CK组得分最高(3.281),整体排名第5.研究表明,草6号和草28号适宜采用纤维素酶与尿素复合添加进行青贮处理,张青谷5号可直接青贮或添加EM复合菌剂进行青贮.

This study aimed to investigate the effects of different types of additives on the silage quality of forage foxtail millet.Three varieties of forage foxtail millet,namely Cao 6,Cao 28,and Zhangqinggu 5,were used as experimental materials.Each variety was divided into five treatment groups,the control group(group CK)without any additives,and the additive treatment groups were added 0.1%EM complex microbial inoculant(group EM),0.1%cellulase(group C),0.5%urea(group U),and 0.1%cellulase+0.5%urea(group CU),respectively.Each group was replicated three repetitions.After 60 days of fermentation,the nutritional quality of forage in each group was measured.The results showed that the sensory scores of each group of silage were all good.Compared with group CK,the pH value of group EM decreased across all varieties,while the pH value of group U increased.Group CU exhibited the highest crude protein(CP)content and the lowest acid detergent fiber(ADF)and neutral detergent fiber(NDF)levels among all varieties.The water-soluble carbohydrate(WSC)content of group U for Cao 6 and group EM for Cao 28 was significantly lower than those of their respective group CK(P<0.05).Based on the comprehensive evaluation using the membership function method,group CU achieved the highest scores for both Cao 6 and Cao 28,with scores of 3.967 and 5.355,ranking first and third overall,respectively.In contrast,group CK of Zhangqinggu 5 had the highest score(3.281),ranking fifth overall.The study shows that Cao 6 and Cao 28 are suitable for silage treatment with a composite additive of cellulase and urea,while Zhangqinggu 5 can be ensiled directly or with the addition of the EM complex microbial inoculant.

徐浩策;张赫楠;齐跃;郭江;瓮巧云;刘颖慧;赵治海;袁进成

河北北方学院,河北 张家口 075000河北北方学院,河北 张家口 075000河北北方学院,河北 张家口 075000河北北方学院,河北 张家口 075000河北北方学院,河北 张家口 075000河北北方学院,河北 张家口 075000张家口市农业科学院,河北 张家口 075000河北北方学院,河北 张家口 075000

农业科技

饲草谷子添加剂青贮品质隶属函数分析

forage foxtail milletadditivessilage qualitymembership function analysis

《饲料研究》 2026 (6)

125-131,7

河北省重点研发项目"现代种业科技创新专项-杂交与优质谷子现代种业科技创新团队"(项目编号:21326302)河北宣化谷子科技小院

10.13557/j.cnki.issn1002-2813.2026.06.021

评论