仓仓上、底料层对奶牛生产性能的影响

IF 2.9 3区 农林科学 Q1 AGRONOMY
Daniel Junges, Maximiliano Henrique de Oliveira Pasetti, Paula de Almeida Carvalho-Estrada, Alvaro Wosniak Bispo, Cristiano Kleinshmitt, Joao Luiz Pratti Daniel, Greiciele de Morais, Luiz Gustavo Nussio
{"title":"仓仓上、底料层对奶牛生产性能的影响","authors":"Daniel Junges,&nbsp;Maximiliano Henrique de Oliveira Pasetti,&nbsp;Paula de Almeida Carvalho-Estrada,&nbsp;Alvaro Wosniak Bispo,&nbsp;Cristiano Kleinshmitt,&nbsp;Joao Luiz Pratti Daniel,&nbsp;Greiciele de Morais,&nbsp;Luiz Gustavo Nussio","doi":"10.1111/gfs.12728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Peripheral areas of horizontal silos are more susceptible to aerobic deterioration, which may affect silage quality. This two-trials study evaluated the performance of Holstein cows fed diets containing corn silage from the upper or bottom half of a well-managed bunker silo. In Trial 1, 20 cows were assigned to a 4 × 4 Latin Square design, with a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement, with 21-days periods. The dietary treatments were (dry matter basis): 50% corn silage from the Top; 60% corn silage from the Top; 50% corn silage from the Bottom; and 60% corn silage from the Bottom. In Trial 2, 24 cows were assigned to a cross-over design with two 21-days periods. The treatments were: 60% corn silage from the Top and 60% corn silage from the Bottom. Corn silage was the sole forage source in both trials. In Trial 1, no interaction was observed among treatments. Cows fed Top silage had greater dry matter intake and milk yield (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01), whereas feed efficiency (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01) was higher for cows fed diets with 60% corn silage. In Trial 2, milk urea nitrogen increased (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01) for cows fed Top compared with Bottom silage. Cows fed diets containing Bottom silage showed greater N retention (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01), indicated by a more positive N balance (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). Collectively, this study suggests that under good silo management, the entire panel can be unloaded for feeding lactating dairy cows.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12767,"journal":{"name":"Grass and Forage Science","volume":"80 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison Between Upper and Bottom Layers in Bunker Silos: Performance of Dairy Cows\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Junges,&nbsp;Maximiliano Henrique de Oliveira Pasetti,&nbsp;Paula de Almeida Carvalho-Estrada,&nbsp;Alvaro Wosniak Bispo,&nbsp;Cristiano Kleinshmitt,&nbsp;Joao Luiz Pratti Daniel,&nbsp;Greiciele de Morais,&nbsp;Luiz Gustavo Nussio\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/gfs.12728\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Peripheral areas of horizontal silos are more susceptible to aerobic deterioration, which may affect silage quality. This two-trials study evaluated the performance of Holstein cows fed diets containing corn silage from the upper or bottom half of a well-managed bunker silo. In Trial 1, 20 cows were assigned to a 4 × 4 Latin Square design, with a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement, with 21-days periods. The dietary treatments were (dry matter basis): 50% corn silage from the Top; 60% corn silage from the Top; 50% corn silage from the Bottom; and 60% corn silage from the Bottom. In Trial 2, 24 cows were assigned to a cross-over design with two 21-days periods. The treatments were: 60% corn silage from the Top and 60% corn silage from the Bottom. Corn silage was the sole forage source in both trials. In Trial 1, no interaction was observed among treatments. Cows fed Top silage had greater dry matter intake and milk yield (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01), whereas feed efficiency (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01) was higher for cows fed diets with 60% corn silage. In Trial 2, milk urea nitrogen increased (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01) for cows fed Top compared with Bottom silage. Cows fed diets containing Bottom silage showed greater N retention (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01), indicated by a more positive N balance (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). Collectively, this study suggests that under good silo management, the entire panel can be unloaded for feeding lactating dairy cows.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12767,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Grass and Forage Science\",\"volume\":\"80 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Grass and Forage Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gfs.12728\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRONOMY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Grass and Forage Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gfs.12728","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

水平筒仓外围区域更易发生好氧变质,影响青贮品质。本研究对荷斯坦奶牛的生产性能进行了两期试验,分别饲喂管理良好的仓仓上半部分或下半部分的玉米青贮饲料。试验1选用20头奶牛,采用4 × 4拉丁方设计,2 × 2因子排列,每期21 d。饲粮处理为(干物质基础):50%玉米青贮;60%玉米青贮;50%底部青贮玉米;60%的青贮玉米来自底层。试验2将24头奶牛分为2个21 d的交叉设计。处理为:上青贮60%玉米,下青贮60%玉米。在两个试验中,玉米青贮饲料是唯一的饲料来源。在试验1中,未观察到治疗之间的相互作用。饲喂Top青贮的奶牛干物质采食量和产奶量更高(p < 0.01),而饲喂60%玉米青贮的奶牛饲料效率更高(p < 0.01)。试验2中,饲喂Top青贮的奶牛乳尿素氮比饲喂Bottom青贮的奶牛增加(p < 0.01)。饲粮中添加底部青贮的奶牛具有较高的氮保留率(p < 0.01),表现为较好的正氮平衡(p < 0.01)。综上所述,本研究表明,在良好的筒仓管理下,整个面板可以卸载用于喂养泌乳奶牛。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparison Between Upper and Bottom Layers in Bunker Silos: Performance of Dairy Cows

Peripheral areas of horizontal silos are more susceptible to aerobic deterioration, which may affect silage quality. This two-trials study evaluated the performance of Holstein cows fed diets containing corn silage from the upper or bottom half of a well-managed bunker silo. In Trial 1, 20 cows were assigned to a 4 × 4 Latin Square design, with a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement, with 21-days periods. The dietary treatments were (dry matter basis): 50% corn silage from the Top; 60% corn silage from the Top; 50% corn silage from the Bottom; and 60% corn silage from the Bottom. In Trial 2, 24 cows were assigned to a cross-over design with two 21-days periods. The treatments were: 60% corn silage from the Top and 60% corn silage from the Bottom. Corn silage was the sole forage source in both trials. In Trial 1, no interaction was observed among treatments. Cows fed Top silage had greater dry matter intake and milk yield (p < 0.01), whereas feed efficiency (p < 0.01) was higher for cows fed diets with 60% corn silage. In Trial 2, milk urea nitrogen increased (p < 0.01) for cows fed Top compared with Bottom silage. Cows fed diets containing Bottom silage showed greater N retention (p < 0.01), indicated by a more positive N balance (p < 0.01). Collectively, this study suggests that under good silo management, the entire panel can be unloaded for feeding lactating dairy cows.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Grass and Forage Science
Grass and Forage Science 农林科学-农艺学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
37
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Grass and Forage Science is a major English language journal that publishes the results of research and development in all aspects of grass and forage production, management and utilization; reviews of the state of knowledge on relevant topics; and book reviews. Authors are also invited to submit papers on non-agricultural aspects of grassland management such as recreational and amenity use and the environmental implications of all grassland systems. The Journal considers papers from all climatic zones.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信