Effects of Using Lactic Acid Bacteria lnoculant and Grains Additives on the Quality of Wet Brewers Grains Silages

Abstract

resh brewers grains materials were delivered directly from the'brewery and were randomly assigned in a four treatment groups. Treatment groups were K control, I mikrobial inoculant 3x10'° LAB cfu.g -' , T wheat grains, I+T bacterial inoculant +grains. Grains were added 3% of wet, weight of the material and. inoculant was applied according to the producer quide 3.3 g.t-1 TM . Samples were filled in the laboratory type PVC silos-after the treatments and stored 90 days. Crude protein % , crude fiber % , pH, NH3-N g.kg-1 D.M , lactic acid % FM , acetic acid % FM and LAB counts cfu.g-' TM were found as; 22.38±0.545, 16.77±0.051, 3.5%0.011, 0.30±0,110, 0.45±0.760, 0.93±0.520, 74x103 for the group of K; 22.16±0.683, 16.54±0.030, 3.64±0.070, 0.20±0.063, 0.50±0.015, 0.24±0.067, 50x102 for the group of I; 21.9%0.444, 15.65±0.387, 3.95±0.015, 0.58±0.038, 0.54±0.036, 1.02±0.079, 142x103 for the group of T; 22.31±0.086, 15.61±0.138, 3.94±0.017, 0.66±0.038, 0.50±0.038, 1.73±0.811, 69x102 for the group of I+T respectively. Differences between the averages of pH, crude fiber and NH3-N values of the treatment groups were found statistically significant p

Keywords

• Wet brewers grains, silage, silage quality, bacterial inoculant.

Bira Posası Silajlarında Katkı Maddesi Olarak Laktik Asit Bakteri Kültürü ve Tahıl Kullanımının Kalite Üzerine Etkileri

Abstract

Üretim merkezinden temin edilen yaş bira posas ı tesadüfi olarak 4 muamele grubuna da ğı t ı lm ışt ı r. Muamele gruplar ı n ı ; K kontrol, I mikrobiyal katk ı 3x101° LAB cfu.g-1 , T tah ı l k ı rmasi, I+T mik ı•obiyal katk ı -tah ı l kı rmas ı uygulamalar ı oluşturmuştur. Tah ı l kı rmas ı materyal ya ş ağı rl ığı n ı n % 3'ü düzeyinde kullan ı l ı rken, mikrobiyal katk ı ilavesinde firma önerileri dikkate al ı nm ışt ı r 3.3 g.t-1 TM . örnekler katk ı uygulamaları n ı takiberı laboratuvar tip ı PVC silolara doldurulmu ş ve 90 gün boyunca bekletilmi şlerdir. Analizler sonras ı nda ham protein % , ham sellüloz % , pH, NH3-N g.kg-1 KM , laktik asit %TM , asetik asit % TM ve LAB yo ğ unluğ u clu.g.' TM s ı ras ı ile K grubu için; 22.38±0.545, 16.77±0.051, 3.59±0.011, 0.30±0.110, 0.45±0.760, 0.93±0.520, 74x103, I grubu için 22.16i0.683, 16.54±0.030, 3.64±0.070, 0.20±0.063, 0.50t0.015, 0.24±0.067, 50x102, T grubu için 21.99±0.444, 15.65±0.387, 3.95±0.015, 0.58±0.038, 0.54±0.036, 1.02±0.079, 142x103, I+T grubu için de 22.31±0.086, 15.61±0.138, 3.94±0.017, 0.68±0.038, 0.50±0.038, 1.73±0.811, 69x102 olarak tesbit edilmittir. pH, ham sellüloz ve NI-13-N içerikleri bak ı m ı ndan gözlenen farkl ı l ı klar önemli bulunmu ştur p< 0.05 .

Keywords

• Ya ş bira posas ı , silaj, silaj kalitesi, mikrobiyal katk ı maddesi.

References

1. ADAS, 1986. The Analysis of Agricultural Materials. Third Edition Reference Book 427.248. London.
2. Aky ı ld ı z, A.R.,-1968: Yemler Bilgisi Laboratuvar K ı lavuzu. A.Ü. Ziraat Fakültesi Yay ı nları : :358. Uygulama Kı lavuzu: 122 Ankara; s. 236.
3. Aky ı ld ı z, A.R., 1986. Yemler Bilgisi ve Teknolojisi. A.Ü. Ziraat Fakültesi Yay ı nları : 974 Ders Kitab ı 286 Ankara, s. 411.
4. Ailen, W.R., K.R.Stevenson and J.G.Buchanan-Smith. 1975. Influence of Additives on Short-Term Preservation of Wet Brewers Grains Stored in Uncovered Piles. Can. J.Anim.Sci. 55:609-618.
5. Ailen, W.R., K.R.Stevenson.1975. Influence of Additives on the Ensiling Process of Wet Brewers Grains. Can.J.Anim.Sci. 53:391-402.
6. Dixon, R., J.Combellas. 1983. A Note on Preservation of Wet Brewers Grains. Trop. Anim. Prod. 8:151.
7. Düzgünet, O., T.Kesici, 0.Kavuncu ve F.Gürbüg, 19,87. Araşt ı rma ve Deneme Metodları (Istatistik Metodlan-II). Ankara. s. 381.
8. Kı l ı ç, A., 1986. Silo Yemi (Ö ğnttim, Öğrenim ve, Uygulama Önerileri). Izmir, s. 327.

9. Kubik, D., R.Stock, 1990. Byproduct Feedstufs for Beef and Dairy Cattle. NebGuide. Cooperative ExtenSion lnstitue of Agriculture and Natural Resources University of NebraskaLincoln. McDonald, S., A.R.Henderson and S.J.E.Heron, 1991. The Biochemistry of Silage. Second Edition. Chalcombe Publication.
10. McDonald, S., R.A. Edwards, J.F.D., Greenhalgh, 1988. Animal Nutrition. 4th. Edition. Longman Scientific and Technical Publucation.
11. McGregor, C.A., 1994. Directory of Feeds&Feed Ingredients. Hoard's Dairyman.
12. NRC, 1989. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. Washington, D.C.
13. Petterson, K., 1988. Ensiling of Forages: Factors Affecting Silage Fermentation and Quality. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Department 'of Animal -Nutrition and Management. Uppsala
14. Phipps, R.H., J.D.Sutton and B.A.Jones, 1995. Forage Mixtures for Dairy Cows: The Effect on Dry-Matter Intake and Milk Production of Incorporating Either Fermented or Urea-Treated Whole-Crop Wheat, Brewers Grains, Fodder Beet or Maize Silage ı nto Diets Based on Grass Silage. Animal Science, 61:491-496.
15. Schneider, R.M., J.H.Harrison and K.A.Loney. 1995. The Effects of Bacterial Inoculants, Beet Pulp, and Propionic Acid on Ensiled Wet Brewers Gratns. J.Dairy Sci. 78:1096- 1105.
16. Seale, D.R., G.Pahlow, S.F.Spoelstra, Slindgren, F Dellaglio and J.F. Lowe, 1990. Methocls for the Microbiological Analysis of Silage. In Proceeding of Eurobac Conference
17. Uppsala, Sweden. Grass and Forage Reports. 3:147 Swedish University of Agricultural Science.
18. Stern, M.D., C.J.Ziemer, 1992. Digestible Fiber Sources for Dairy Cattle. Proc.Minn.Nutr Conf. 53:37-56.