垫料床对育肥羔羊生长性能和臭气排放的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.24.012

中国农业科学 ›› 2022, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (24): 4943-4956.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.24.012

垫料床对育肥羔羊生长性能和臭气排放的影响

车大璐¹(),赵俐辰¹,程素彩²,刘爱瑜¹,李晓宇¹,赵寿培¹,王健诚³,王媛⁴,高玉红¹(),孙新胜⁵()

¹河北农业大学动物科技学院，河北保定 071001
²廊坊市农林科学院，河北廊坊 065000
³河北省畜牧总站，石家庄 0500352
⁴河北省羊肉羊产业技术研究院，石家庄 050011
⁵河北农业大学信息与技术学院，河北保定 071001

收稿日期:2021-09-27 接受日期:2022-08-04 出版日期:2022-12-16 发布日期:2023-01-04
通讯作者: 高玉红,孙新胜
作者简介:车大璐，E-mail：1349896101@qq.com。
基金资助:
河北省重点研发计划(20326612D);河北省现代农业产业技术体系羊产业创新团队建设专项(HBCT2018140205);河北省高等学校科学技术研究项目(ZD2021323);河北省自然科学基金(C2021204128)

Effect of Litter Bed on Growth Performance and Odor Emission in Fattening Lamb

CHE DaLu¹(),ZHAO LiChen¹,CHENG SuCai²,LIU AiYu¹,LI XiaoYu¹,ZHAO ShouPei¹,WANG JianCheng³,WANG Yuan⁴,GAO YuHong¹(),SUN XinSheng⁵()

¹College of Animal Science and Technology, Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding 071001, Hebei
²Langfang Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Langfang 065000, Hebei
³Animal Husbandry Station of Hebei, Shijiazhuang 050035
⁴Hebei Mutton Sheep Industry Technology Research Institute, Shijiazhuang 050011
⁵College of Information and Technology, Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding 071001, Hebei

Received:2021-09-27 Accepted:2022-08-04 Online:2022-12-16 Published:2023-01-04
Contact: YuHong GAO,XinSheng SUN

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】针对近几年肉羊育肥集中区面临臭气面源污染的难题，探讨垫料床对育肥羔羊生长性能及舍内臭气组分的影响，为育肥羊舍的臭气减排提供技术路径。【方法】选择250只体重相近、年龄一致的健康育肥羔羊，随机分为5组，根据垫料床材料不同，分为对照组（素土地面）、A组（全锯末）、B组（糠醛+锯末）、C组（稻壳+锯末）和D组（玉米芯+锯末），试验期90 d（前期1—45 d；后期46—90 d）。采用GC-MS方法，对不同试验期垫料床上部空间和垫料内部空间的臭气组分进行检测，并分析垫料床对育肥羔羊生长性能的影响。【结果】（1）4个垫料组与对照组比较，羔羊的日增重较对照组分别提高7.7 %（A组）、8.7 %（B组）、12.1 %（C组）和7.8 %（D组）（P<0.05），但日采食量和料重比未表现出显著性差异（P>0.05）；（2）整个试验期垫料床上部空间和垫料内部空间分别检测出9大类和8大类臭气组分，包括31种挥发性有机物（VOCs）（醇类4种、烷类10种、胺类3种、酚类1种、酯类7种、酮类4种、醛类2种、酸类3种和硫醇类1种）。垫料组与对照组比较，检测出的臭气组分种类基本一致。（3）从臭气组分含量分析，不同试验期不同检测空间均表现为烷类含量占比最高，达52.0 %—77.5 %，但各组间差异不显著（P>0.05），而酚类与胺类含量则表现为试验前期和后期4个垫料组2个检测空间显著低于对照组（P<0.05），其中C组降低最明显。比较前、后期的臭气含量，垫料床上部空间和内部空间均表现为前期醇类、胺类和酚类含量显著高于后期（P<0.05），但后期酯类含量显著高于前期（P<0.05）。（4）试验期间垫料床上部和内部空间检测出的主要致臭物质均为4种，即，2-乙基己醇、N,N-二甲基乙酰胺、苯酚和1H-吲哚-3-硫醇。与对照组比较，各垫料组的4种致臭成分含量均表现出降低趋势，且C组降低最明显（P<0.05）。【结论】4种组合垫料不仅改善了育肥羔羊的生长性能，还减少了空气环境中的臭气含量，为羊舍的臭气减排提供技术路径。

关键词: 垫料, 羊, 生长性能, 臭气, 挥发性有机物

Abstract:

【Objective】 In view of the problem of odor non-point source pollution in fattening area of mutton sheep in recent years, the effects of bedding bed on growth performance of fattening lambs and odor components in the house were discussed, so as to provide technical path for odor emission reduction in fattening sheep house. 【Method】Two-hundred fifty healthy fattening lambs with similar weight and age were used and randomly divided into 5 groups according to different bedding materials, which were control group (plain soil), group A (full-sawdust), group B (furfural + sawdust), group C (rice husk + sawdust), and group D (corn cob + sawdust). The trial period was 90 days (d 1-45 in early period; d 46-90 in late period). The odor components in environment above and inside the litter bed were detected by using GC-MS method during different periods, and the effect of litter bed on production performance in fattening lambs was also analyzed. 【Result】(1) Compared with the control group, the four groups with litter bed demonstrated an increase in daily feed intake (P<0.05), which was increased by 7.7 % in group A and 8.7 % in Group B, 12.1 % in Group C, and 7.8 % in Group D. However, the daily gain and ratio of feed to gain exhibited no difference (P>0.05). (2) Nine kinds and eight kinds of odor components were detected throughout test period above litter bed and inside litter bed, respectively, and the components consisted of 31 kinds of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), including 4 alcohols, 10 alkanes, 3 amines, 1 phenol, 7 esters, 4 ketones, 2 aldehydes, 3 acids, and 1 thiol. The odor kinds detected in 4 litter groups were basically same as the control group. (3) From content analysis of odor components, the alkane content was the highest with 52.0 %-77.5 % among all odor components, no matter experimental period or detected space; however, no difference was observed among all groups (P>0.05). Also, the content of phenol or amine in litter groups demonstrated a decrease (P<0.05) in two detected spaces in early and late periods, compared with the control, exhibiting the decrease in group C was obvious. Besides, the content of alcohol, amine, or phenol was higher (P<0.05) in early period than that in late period both upper and inner spaces of litter bed; however, the ester content in late period was higher (P<0.05) than that in early period. (4) During entire experimental period, four kinds of key odor-causing substances were detected both in upper and inner of litter bed, including 2-ethylhexanol, N,N-dimethylacetamide, phenol, and 1 H-indole-3-thiol. For the contents of the four odor-causing components, each litter group showed a decreasing trend, compared with the control group, and the decrease in group C was the most obvious (P<0.05). 【Conclusion】In summary, four combined litter beds in this study could improve growth performance in fattening lambs, and decrease odor content in environment. The results would provide a technical pathway for reduction of odor emission in sheep barn.

Key words: litter, sheep, growth performance, odor, volatile organic compound

车大璐,赵俐辰,程素彩,刘爱瑜,李晓宇,赵寿培,王健诚,王媛,高玉红,孙新胜. 垫料床对育肥羔羊生长性能和臭气排放的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(24): 4943-4956.

CHE DaLu,ZHAO LiChen,CHENG SuCai,LIU AiYu,LI XiaoYu,ZHAO ShouPei,WANG JianCheng,WANG Yuan,GAO YuHong,SUN XinSheng. Effect of Litter Bed on Growth Performance and Odor Emission in Fattening Lamb[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2022, 55(24): 4943-4956.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.24.012

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2022/V55/I24/4943

图/表 9

表1

表2

表3

表4

试验前、后期垫料床上部空间环境的臭气组分"

试验期 Period	组别 Group	醇类 Alcohol	烷类 Alkane	胺类 Amine	酚类 Phenol	酯类 Ester	酮类 Ketone	醛类 Aldehyde	酸类 Acid	硫醇类 Mercaptan
试验前期 Early period （d 1-45）	对照组 Control group	2-乙基己醇 2-ethylhexanol 三甲基硅醇 Trimethyl silanol	二乙氧基二甲基硅烷 Diethoxy dimethyl silane 六甲基二硅氧 Hexamethyl di siloxane 六甲基环三硅氧烷 Hexamethyl cyclotri siloxane 八甲基环四硅氧烷 Octamethyl cyclotetra siloxane 十二甲基五硅氧烷 Dodecamethylpenta siloxane	N,N-二甲基乙酰胺 N,N-Dimethylacetamide	苯酚 Phenol	乙酸三甲基硅酯 Trimethylsilyl Acetate	2,6-二羟基苯乙酮 2,6-DihyDroxyace- tophenone	-	-
	A组 Group A	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	-	-	-	-
	B组 Group B	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	-	2,5-二羟基苯甲醛 2,5-DihyDroxyben- zaldehyde	-	-
	C组 Group C	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同B组 Same as Group B	-	-
	D组 Group D	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	-	-	-
试验后期 Late period （d 46-90）	对照组 Control group	三甲基硅醇 Trimethylsilanol	同前期对照组 Same as early-period Control	同前期对照组 Same as early-period Control	同前期对照组 Same as early- period Control	水杨酯 Salicyl ester 丙酸三甲基硅酯 Trimethylsilyl Propionate 三甲基硅乙酸酯 Trimethylsilyl acetate 乙酸三甲基硅酯 Trimethylsilyl acetate	丙酮 Acetone	-	2-甲基丙酸 2-methyl propionic acid 丁二酸 Succinic acid	1H-吲哚-3-硫醇 1H-indole-3-thiol
	A组 Group A	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	水杨酯 Salicyl ester 三甲基硅乙酸酯 Trimethylsilyl acetate 乙酸三甲基硅酯 Trimethylsilyl acetate	同对照组 Same as Control	-	2-甲基丙酸 2-methyl- propionic acid	-
	B组 Group B	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	丁胺 Butylamine N,N-二甲基乙酰胺 N,N-Dimethylacetamide	同对照组 Same as Control	同A组 Same as Group A	同对照组 Same as Control	-	同A组 Same as Group A	同对照组 Same as Control
	C组 Group C	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同A组 Same as Group A	同对照组 Same as Control	-	同A组 Same as Group A	-
	D组 Group D	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同A组 Same as Group A	同对照组 Same as Control	-	同A组 Same as Group A

表4

表5

试验前、后期垫料内部环境的臭气组分"

试验期 Period	组别 Group	醇类 Alcohol	烷类 Alkane	胺类 Amine	酚类 Phenol	酯类 Ester	酮类 Ketone	酸类 Acid	硫醇类 Mercaptan
试验前期 Early period （1-45 d）	对照组 Control group	2-乙基己醇 2-ethylhexanol 三甲基硅醇 Trimethylsilanol	二乙氧基二甲基硅烷 Diethoxy dimethyl silane 六甲基二硅氧烷 Hexamethyldi siloxane 六甲基环三硅氧烷 Hexamethylcyclotri siloxane 八甲基环四硅氧烷 Octamethylcyclotetra siloxane 十二甲基五硅氧烷 Dodecamethylpenta siloxane	N,N-二甲基乙酰胺 N,N-Dimethylacetamide	苯酚 Phenol	乙酸三甲基硅酯 Trimethylsilyl acetate	异佛尔酮 Isophorone	-	-
	A组 Group A	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	甲酰胺Formamide N,N-二甲基乙酰胺 N,N-Dimethylacetamide	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	3-羟基扁桃酸 3-hydroxymandelic acid
	B组 Group B	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	-	-	1H-吲哚-3-硫醇 1H-indole-3-thiol
	C组 Group C	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	-	-	-
	D组 Group D	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	-		-
试验后期 Late period （46-90 d）	对照组 Control group	三甲基硅醇 Trimethylsilanol	同前期对照组 Same as early-period Control	同前期对照组 Same as early-period Control	同前期对照组 Same as early- period Control	苯甲酸乙酯 Ethyl benzoate 乙酸三甲基硅酯 Trimethylsilyl acetate 丙酸三甲基硅酯 Trimethylsilyl propionate	丙酮 Acetone	2-甲基丙酸 2-methylpropionic acid	1H-吲哚-3-硫醇 1H-indole-3-thiol
	A组 Group A	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	水杨酯 Salicyl ester 乙酸三甲基硅酯 Trimethylsilyl acetate	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control
	B组 Group B	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同A组 Same as Group A	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control
	C组 Group C	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同A组 Same as Group A	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control
	D组 Group D	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	水杨酯 Salicyl ester 乙酸三甲基硅酯 Trimethylsilyl acetate 间甲苯异硫氰酸酯 M-toluene isothiocyanate	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control	同对照组 Same as Control

表5

表6

表7

表8

表9

参考文献 35

[1]	车大璐, 谷晓扬, 卢冬梅, 单春花, 赵娟娟, 王超, 陈晓勇, 赵娜, 高玉红. 育肥羊舍喷洒微生物除臭剂对氨气的去除效果研究. 家畜生态学报, 2020, 41(7): 64-67. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-1182.2020.07.012. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-1182.2020.07.012
	CHE D L, GU X Y, LU D M, SHAN C H, ZHAO J J, WANG C, CHEN X Y, ZHAO N, GAO Y H. Effect of spraying microbiological deodorant on removal of ammonia in fattening sheep shed. Acta Ecologae Animalis Domastici, 2020, 41(7): 64-67. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-1182.2020.07.012. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-1182.2020.07.012
[2]	刘婕, 籍景淑, 雷明刚, 张妮娅, 齐德生. 猪场氨气除臭剂的研究及效果评价. 养殖与饲料, 2015(3): 1-7. doi:10.13300/j.cnki.cn42-1648/s.2015.03.002. doi: 10.13300/j.cnki.cn42-1648/s.2015.03.002
	LIU J, JI J S, LEI M G, ZHANG N Y, QI D S. Research and effect evaluation of ammonia deodorant for pig farm. Animals Breeding and Feed, 2015(3): 1-7. doi:10.13300/j.cnki.cn42-1648/s.2015.03.002. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13300/j.cnki.cn42-1648/s.2015.03.002
[3]	余鹏举, 曹先贺, 王宏志, 李少杰. 微生物在恶臭污染治理中的研究及应用. 微生物学通报, 2021, 48(1): 165-179. doi:10.13344/j.microbiol.china.200332. doi: 10.13344/j.microbiol.china.200332
	YU P J, CAO X H, WANG H Z, LI S J. Microbial deodorization: mechanisms and application. Microbiology China, 2021, 48(1): 165-179. doi:10.13344/j.microbiol.china.200332. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13344/j.microbiol.china.200332
[4]	徐杏, 肖华, 周昕, 朱晓明, 周卫东. 畜禽场恶臭VOCs的产生及防控技术进展. 环境工程, 2020, 38(8): 180-187. doi:10.13205/j.hjgc.202008030. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202008030
	XU X, XIAO H, ZHOU X, ZHU X M, ZHOU W D. Progress in generation, prevention and control of odorous vocs from livestock and poultry farms. Environmental Engineering, 2020, 38(8): 180-187. doi:10.13205/j.hjgc.202008030. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202008030
[5]	CARNOVALE F, PHILLIPS C J C. The effects of heat stress on sheep welfare during live export voyages from Australia to the middle east. Animals: an Open Access Journal from MDPI, 2020, 10(4): 694. doi:10.3390/ani10040694. doi: 10.3390/ani10040694
[6]	罗会琴, 董新星, 王孝义, 兰国湘, 李俄然, 李明丽. 规模猪场舍区空气污染及防制措施. 畜牧兽医杂志, 2018, 37(2): 87-90. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-6704.2018.02.030. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-6704.2018.02.030
	LUO H Q, DONG X X, WANG X Y, LAN G X, LI E R, LI M L. Air pollution and corresponding prevention measures in large-scale pig farms. Journal of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2018, 37(2): 87-90. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-6704.2018.02.030. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-6704.2018.02.030
[7]	王茄灵, 吕青阳, 刘杨, 许力山, 秦维, 闫志英. 基于原位控制技术的粪污除臭菌剂研发现状. 应用与环境生物学报: 1-16[2021-09-13].
	WANG J L, LÜ Q Y, LIU Y, XU L S, QIN W, YAN Z Y. Research and development status of fecal microbial deodorant based on insitu Control technology. Chinese Journal of Applied and Environmental Biology: 1-16[2021-09-13]. (in Chinese)
[8]	马石霞, 摆倩文, 周魏, 马咸莹, 田攀, 蔡新东, 范思思, 王晓航, 马忠仁, 陈士恩, 孙娜, 丁功涛. 微生物除臭剂应用于畜禽养殖场的研究现状. 浙江农业学报, 2021, 33(8): 1552-1564. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2021.08.22
	MA S X, BAI Q W, ZHOU W, MA X Y, TIAN P, CAI X D, FAN S S, WANG X H, MA Z R, CHEN S E, SUN N, DING G T. Application of microbial deodorant in livestock and poultry farms. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(8): 1552-1564. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2021.08.22
[9]	冯柳柳, 单春乔, 王效禹, 赵荣, 宋凡, 宋蕙男, 刘艳. 微生物联合酶制剂对鸡粪高效无害化处理的研究. 中国家禽, 2019, 41(9): 63-66. doi:10.16372/j.issn.1004-6364.2019.09.012. doi: 10.16372/j.issn.1004-6364.2019.09.012
	FENG L L, SHAN C Q, WANG X Y, ZHAO R, SONG F, SONG H N, LIU Y. Study on the efficient harmless treatment of chicken manure by microorganism combined enzyme. China Poultry, 2019, 41(9): 63-66. doi:10.16372/j.issn.1004-6364.2019.09.012. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16372/j.issn.1004-6364.2019.09.012
[10]	黄晓燕, 郑爱荣, 王彦华, 李桂莲, 张晓霞, 张国启. 猪场有害气体防控技术研究进展. 家畜生态学报, 2019, 40(10): 82-87.
	HUANG X Y, ZHENG A R, WANG Y H, LI G L, ZHANG X X, ZHANG G Q. Research progress of harmful gas prevention and control technology in pig farms. Journal of Domestic Animal Ecology, 2019, 40(10): 82-87. (in Chinese)
[11]	郭军蕊, 刘国华, 杨斌, 张爱华, 王月超. 畜禽养殖场除臭技术研究进展. 动物营养学报, 2013, 25(8): 1708-1714.
	GUO J R, LIU G H, YANG B, ZHANG A H, WANG Y C. Deodorization technology of livestock and poultry farming. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2013, 25(8): 1708-1714. (in Chinese)
[12]	张健, 王亚非, 商鹏, 强巴央宗. 高海拔地区干式发酵床饲养藏猪技术的初步研究. 家畜生态学报, 2017, 38(11): 72-75.
	ZHANG J, WANG Y F, SHANG P, QIANG B. Preliminary study on technology of dry fermentation bed raising Tibetan pigs at high altitude. Journal of Domestic Animal Ecology, 2017, 38(11): 72-75. (in Chinese)
[13]	李健, 华利忠, 蔡梦, 杨杰, 徐小波, 宦海琳, 邵乐, 秦枫, 潘孝青, 顾洪如. 不同处理方式对发酵床模式下猪主要寄生虫病防治效果. 畜牧与兽医, 2018, 50(12): 108-112.
	LI J, HUA L Z, CAI M, YANG J, XU X B, HUAN H L, SHAO L, QIN F, PAN X Q, GU H R. Effect of different methods for prevention and control of main parasitic diseases in pigs under bio-bed system. Animal Husbandry ＆ Veterinary Medicine, 2018, 50(12): 108-112. (in Chinese)
[14]	李健, 杨杰, 徐小波, 邵乐, 秦枫, 潘孝青, 宦海琳, 薛青, 顾洪如. 不同饲养方式及发酵床垫料环境对猪生产性能、血液生化指标及肠道消化酶活性的影响. 畜牧与兽医, 2018, 50(12): 15-20.
	LI J, YANG J, XU X B, SHAO L, QIN F, PAN X Q, HUAN H L, XUE Q, GU H R. Effects of different feeding methods and bio-bed litters on growth performance, blood biochemical indexes and intestinal digestive enzyme activities in pigs. Animal Husbandry ＆ Veterinary Medicine, 2018, 50(12): 15-20. (in Chinese)
[15]	郭彤, 田锦, 李凌燕, 李晓晨. 发酵床垫料对生长肥育猪肠道菌群、血清生化指标以及免疫功能的影响. 中国畜牧杂志, 2019, 55(11): 160-163. doi:10.19556/j.0258-7033.20190326-10. doi: 10.19556/j.0258-7033.20190326-10
	GUO T, TIAN J, LI L Y, LI X C. The effect of fermented mattress material on the intestinal flora, serum biochemical indexes and immune function of growing and finishing pigs. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2019, 55(11): 160-163. doi:10.19556/j.0258-7033.20190326-10. (in Chinese) doi: 10.19556/j.0258-7033.20190326-10
[16]	赵金波, 赵文江, 白长胜, 杨海天, 姜海龙, 韩明子. 精准饲养模式在现代养猪生产中的优化利用研究. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2019(2): 50-51, 55. doi:10.13881/j.cnki.hljxmsy.2018.05.0179. doi: 10.13881/j.cnki.hljxmsy.2018.05.0179
	ZHAO J B, ZHAO W J, BAI C S, YANG H T, JIANG H L, HAN M Z. Research on the optimization and utilization of Precision Breeding Model in modern pig production. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2019(2): 50-51, 55. doi:10.13881/j.cnki.hljxmsy.2018.05.0179. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13881/j.cnki.hljxmsy.2018.05.0179
[17]	张强, 王家安, 王洁, 梁艳, 王海洋, 郭梦玲, 杨章平, 毛永江. 发酵床牛舍与散放式牛舍对荷斯坦牛泌乳性能的影响. 家畜生态学报, 2020, 41(8): 58-63.
	ZHANG Q, WANG J A, WANG J, LIANG Y, WANG H Y, GUO M L, YANG Z P, MAO Y J. Effect of fermentation bed and free-stall housing on the lactation performance of Holstein cows. Journal of Domestic Animal Ecology, 2020, 41(8): 58-63. (in Chinese)
[18]	王珊, 顾亚兰, 张振斌, 甄永康, 陈逸飞, 王梦芝, 陈宁. 发酵床奶牛舍垫料理化性状和霉菌毒素的季节与方位变化. 家畜生态学报, 2021, 42(4): 72-77.
	WANG S, GU Y L, ZHANG Z B, ZHEN Y K, CHEN Y F, WANG M Z, CHEN N. Seasonal and orientation changes in physical and chemical and mycotoxin indicators in dairy cattle fermentation beds. Journal of Domestic Animal Ecology, 2021, 42(4): 72-77. (in Chinese)
[19]	孙金艳, 王雁, 庄雨龙, 彭福刚, 李忠秋, 孙晓玉, 王洪亮, 王嘉博, 孙芳. 冬季卧床垫草对西门塔尔育成公牛增重效果的影响. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2018(24): 43-45. doi:10.13881/j.cnki.hljxmsy.2018.03.0372. doi: 10.13881/j.cnki.hljxmsy.2018.03.0372
	SUN J Y, WANG Y, ZHUANG Y L, PENG F G, LI Z Q, SUN X Y, WANG H L, WANG J B, SUN F. The effect of mat grass on weight gain of breeding Simmental bull in winter. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2018(24): 43-45. doi:10.13881/j.cnki.hljxmsy.2018.03.0372. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13881/j.cnki.hljxmsy.2018.03.0372
[20]	吴学红, 刘兴能, 邓卫东, 席冬梅. 高海拔地区山羊发酵床的制作及应用效果评价. 畜牧与兽医, 2021, 53(6): 38-40.
	WU X H, LIU X N, DENG W D, XI D M. Production and application of fermentation bed for goats at high altitude. Animal Husbandry ＆ Veterinary Medicine, 2021, 53(6): 38-40. (in Chinese)
[21]	秦竹, 周忠凯, 顾洪如, 杨杰, 宦海琳, 张霞, 周晓云, 余刚. 发酵床生猪养殖中菌种与垫料的研究进展. 安徽农业科学, 2012, 40(30): 14771-14774, 14822. doi:10.13989/j.cnki.0517-6611.2012.30.259. doi: 10.13989/j.cnki.0517-6611.2012.30.259
	QIN Z, ZHOU Z K, GU H R, YANG J, HUAN H L, ZHANG X, ZHOU X Y, YU G. Advances in the strains and beddings of deep-litter systems for swine breeding. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2012, 40(30): 14771-14774, 14822. doi:10.13989/j.cnki.0517-6611.2012.30.259. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13989/j.cnki.0517-6611.2012.30.259
[22]	刘宇锋, 罗佳, 严少华, 张振华. 发酵床垫料特性与资源化利用研究进展. 江苏农业学报, 2015, 31(3): 700-707.
	LIU Y F, LUO J, YAN S H, ZHANG Z H. Research progress in characteristics of litter in a pig-on-litter system for swine production and their resource utilization. Jiangsu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 31(3): 700-707. (in Chinese)
[23]	单春花, 郭建军, 赵娟娟, 王超, 赵寿培, 王亚男, 高玉红. 卧床垫料中牛粪与稻壳比例对奶牛趴卧行为、消化性能和泌乳性能的影响. 动物营养学报, 2019, 31(4): 1645-1654.
	SHAN C H, GUO J J, ZHAO J J, WANG C, ZHAO S P, WANG Y N, GAO Y H. Effects of manure/rice husk ratio in beddings on lying behavior, digestive performance and milk performance of dairy cows. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2019, 31(4): 1645-1654. (in Chinese)
[24]	高倩玉. 两种生物发酵床垫料制备方法对育肥猪养殖效果影响的研究[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2018.
	GAO Q Y. Research of pig effects in the two kinds of bio-bed system[D]. Shenyang: Shenyang Agricultural University, 2018. (in Chinese)
[25]	杨丽萍, 王磊. 畜牧场恶臭的产生与防治对策. 畜牧兽医杂志, 2016, 35(6): 101-103.
	YANG L P, WANG L. The countermeasures of livestock farm stench sources and control. Journal of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2016, 35(6): 101-103. (in Chinese)
[26]	周谈龙, 尚斌, 董红敏, 陶秀萍, 刘统帅, 王悦. 中试规模猪粪堆肥挥发性有机物排放特征. 农业工程学报, 2017, 33(6): 192-198.
	ZHOU T L, SHANG B, DONG H M, TAO X P, LIU T S, WANG Y. Emission characteristics of volatile organic compounds during pilot swine manure composting. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2017, 33(6): 192-198. (in Chinese)
[27]	沈玉君, 张朋月, 赵立欣, 孟海波, 程红胜. 猪粪好氧发酵过程中挥发性有机物组分分析及致臭因子的确定. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(4): 205-210.
	SHEN Y J, ZHANG P Y, ZHAO L X, MENG H B, CHENG H S. Component analysis of volatile organic compounds and determination of key odor in pig manure aerobic fermentation process. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2016, 32(4): 205-210. (in Chinese)
[28]	张朋月, 沈玉君, 刘树庆. 畜禽粪便好氧发酵过程中挥发性气体排放差异研究. 农业环境科学学报, 2015, 34(7): 1378-1383.
	ZHANG P Y, SHEN Y J, LIU S Q. Volatile gas emissions from different types of animal manure during aerobic fermentation process. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2015, 34(7): 1378-1383. (in Chinese)
[29]	刘文杰, 沈玉君, 孟海波, 张曦, 赵立欣, 丁京涛, 周海宾, 王黎明. 牛粪好氧发酵挥发性物质排放特征及恶臭物质分析. 农业工程学报, 2020, 36(22): 222-230.
	LIU W J, SHEN Y J, MENG H B, ZHANG X, ZHAO L X, DING J T, ZHOU H B, WANG L M. Emission characteristics of volatile matter and identification of odor substances during aerobic fermentation of cattle manure. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2020, 36(22): 222-230. (in Chinese)
[30]	张文韬, 罗晓飞. 顶空固相微萃取-气相色谱法同时测定饮用水中2, 4-二氯酚、2, 4, 6三氯酚、五氯酚. 预防医学情报杂志, 2021, 37(8): 1159-1163.
	ZHANG W T, LUO X F. Simultaneous determination of 2, 4-dichlorophenol, 2, 4, 6-trichlorophenol and penta chlorophenol in drinking water by headspace solid phase microextraction coupled with gas chromatography. Journal of Preventive Medicine Information, 2021, 37(8): 1159-1163. (in Chinese)
[31]	郑浩, 丁震, 高圣华, 张岚, 徐燕. 突发饮用水污染事件人群健康风险评估方法的探讨:以江苏镇江苯酚水污染事件为例. 环境与职业医学, 2020, 37(7): 690-694. doi:10.13213/j.cnki.jeom. 2020.19895. doi: 10.13213/j.cnki.jeom. 2020.19895
	ZHENG H, DING Z, GAO S H, ZHANG L, XU Y. Health risk assessment of drinking water pollutants in emergencies: Phenol water pollution event in Zhenjiang, Jiangsu. Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 2020, 37(7): 690-694. doi:10.13213/j.cnki.jeom.2020.19895. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13213/j.cnki.jeom. 2020.19895
[32]	CELEIRO M, FACORRO R, DAGNAC T, LLOMPART M. Simultaneous determination of trace levels of multiclass fungicides in natural waters by solid - phase microextraction - gas chromatography- tandem mass spectrometry. Analytica Chimica Acta, 2018, 1020: 51-61. doi:10.1016/j.aca.2018.03.014. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2018.03.014
[33]	侯博, 张万智, 韩永辉, 张国龙. 水体中酚类化合物测定方法的研究进展. 化学试剂, 2019, 41(8): 802-806. doi:10.13822/j.cnki.hxsj.2019006919. doi: 10.13822/j.cnki.hxsj.2019006919
	HOU B, ZHANG W Z, HAN Y H, ZHANG G L. Advances in the determination of phenolic compounds in water. Chemical Reagents, 2019, 41(8): 802-806. doi:10.13822/j.cnki.hxsj.2019006919. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13822/j.cnki.hxsj.2019006919
[34]	林坚, 李琳, 刘俊新, 李美艳. 城市污水厂主要处理单元恶臭及挥发性有机物的逸散. 环境工程学报, 2016, 10(5): 2329-2334.
	LIN J, LI L, LIU J X, LI M Y. Odors and volatile organic compounds emission from main processing units of wastewater treatment plant. Chinese Journal of Environmental Engineering, 2016, 10(5): 2329-2334. (in Chinese)
[35]	陈文和, 邓明佳, 罗辉, 张婧赢, 丁文杰, 刘俊新, 李琳. 污泥直接干化产生的恶臭及挥发性有机物特征研究. 环境科学, 2014, 35(8): 2897-2902. doi:10.13227/j.hjkx.2014.08.009. doi: 10.13227/j.hjkx.2014.08.009
	CHEN W H, DENG M J, LUO H, ZHANG J Y, DING W J, LIU J X, LI L. Characteristics of odors and VOCs from sludge direct drying process. Environmental Science, 2014, 35(8): 2897-2902. doi:10.13227/j.hjkx.2014.08.009. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13227/j.hjkx.2014.08.009

原料Raw material	含水率Moisture content (%)	含碳率Carbon content (%)	含氮率Nitrogen content (%)
锯末Sawdust	13.0	50.2	0.13
糠醛Furfural	54.7	43.6	0.52
稻壳Rice husk	8.5	41.0	0.45
玉米芯Corn cob	9.6	42.3	0.48

原料 Ingredient	含量 Content (%)	营养水平 Nutrient level	含量 Content (%)
花生秧 Peanut seedling	37.50	代谢能 ME (MJ·kg^-1)	9.88
全株玉米青贮 Whole plant corn silage	10.00	粗蛋白质 CP	14.30
玉米 Corn	33.80	中性洗涤纤维 NDF	38.60
豆粕 Soybean meal	10.00	酸性洗涤纤维 ADF	26.71
棉籽粕 Cotton meal	4.00	脂肪 EE	2.71
石粉 Stone powder	1.40	钙 Ca	0.55
盐 NaCl	0.50	磷 P	0.32
小苏打 NaHCO₃	1.40
预混料 Premix^①	1.40
合计 Total	100.00

指标 Index	对照组 Control group	A组 Group A	B组 Group B	C组 Group C	D组 Group D	标准误 SEM	P值 P-value
平均日采食量 ADFI (kg·d^-1)	0.48	0.50	0.49	0.51	0.50	0.02	0.995
平均日增重 ADG (g·d^-1)	140.34a	151.11b	152.55b	157.37b	152.64b	1.83	0.045
料重比 F/G	3.42	3.34	3.27	3.25	3.33	0.04	0.686

试验期 Period	组别 Group	醇类 Alcohol	烷类 Alkane	胺类 Amine	酚类 Phenol	酯类 Ester	酮类 Ketone	醛类 Aldehyde	酸类 Acid	硫醇类 Mercaptan
试验前期 Early period (d 1-45)	对照组 Control group	11.08a	59.24	20.42a	3.26a	6.01	-	-	-
	A组Group A	6.85a	66.60	16.89b	2.86b	6.81	-	-	-	-
	B组Group B	5.36b	65.02	16.55b	2.85b	6.84	-	3.39	-	-
	C组Group C	5.20b	60.17	15.87b	2.48b	7.57	0.47	8.26	-	-
	D组Group D	5.30b	73.27	16.17b	2.74b	2.14	0.38	-	-	-
	标准误 SEM	0.77	1.74	0.59	0.08	0.94	-	-	-	-
	P值 P-value	0.026	0.370	0.046	0.002	0.418	-	-	-	-
试验后期 Late period (d 46-90)	对照组 Control group	1.36	67.44	3.86b	0.10b	16.26	6.54a	-	3.37	1.08
	A组Group A	2.35	58.59	1.51c	0.17b	28.65	7.02a	-	1.70	-
	B组Group B	1.94	52.01	10.95a	0.30a	23.48	5.13a	-	5.66	0.52
	C组Group C	1.94	60.62	1.28c	0.07b	30.30	1.20b	-	4.59	-
	D组Group D	1.37	59.90	1.43c	0.13b	26.66	3.81a	-	6.70	-
	标准误 SEM	0.32	2.41	1.00	0.027	2.32	0.75	-	0.66
	P值 P-value	0.881	0.423	0.001	0.029	0.365	0.049	--	0.113	-

试验期 Period	组别 Group	醇类 Alcohol	烷类 Alkane	胺类 Amine	酚类 Phenol	酯类 Ester	酮类 Ketone	醛类 Aldehyde	酸类 Acid	硫醇类 Mercaptan
试验前期 Early period (d 1-45)	对照组 Control group	12.31	54.11	22.95a	5.90a	4.70	0.03	-	-	-
	A组Group A	8.66	57.34	19.96b	4.42b	8.14	0.03	-	1.46	-
	B组Group B	8.67	61.04	19.93b	4.31b	5.87	-	-	-	0.16
	C组Group C	7.44	67.17	18.86b	3.71b	2.81	-	-	-	-
	D组Group D	9.22	52.92	19.31b	3.99b	6.27	-	8.30	-	-
	标准误 SEM	0.65	3.55	0.47	0.22	0.65	-	-	-	-
	P值 P-value	0.181	0.11	0.036	0.005	0.104	-	-	-	-
试验后期 Late period (d 46-90)	对照组 Control group	0.94	62.28	3.38a	1.36a	24.18	3.60a	-	2.80a	1.47a
	A组Group A	1.61	63.25	2.23b	1.10bc	26.70	2.29b	-	2.23b	0.61b
	B组Group B	1.69	66.56	2.27b	1.16b	21.27	3.13b	-	3.14a	0.78b
	C组Group C	2.85	77.47	1.36c	0.60c	14.79	1.33c	-	1.37b	0.26b
	D组Group D	1.47	73.07	1.83c	0.85c	18.54	1.83bc	-	1.96b	0.46b
	标准误 SEM	0.33	2.16	0.18	0.07	2.15	0.23	-	0.16	0.12
	P值 P-value	0.516	0.098	0.001	0.001	0.475	0.001	-	0.001	0.042

垫料床对育肥羔羊生长性能和臭气排放的影响

Effect of Litter Bed on Growth Performance and Odor Emission in Fattening Lamb

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 35

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

试验期 Period	组别 Group	2-乙基己醇 2-ethylhexanol	N,N-二甲基乙酰胺N,N-Dimethylacetamide	苯酚 Phenol	1H-吲哚-3-硫醇 1H-indole-3-thiol
试验前期 Early period (1-45 d)	对照组 Control group	4.87a	18.99a	3.20a	-
	A组Group A	4.49b	16.74b	2.86a	-
	B组Group B	4.27b	16.55b	2.85a	-
	C组Group C	4.17b	15.87b	2.48b	-
	D组Group D	4.22b	16.17b	2.74a	-
	标准误 SEM	0.09	0.18	0.084	-
	P值 P-value	0.048	0.045	0.041	-
试验后期 Late period (46- 90 d)	对照组 Control group	-	3.86±0.44a	0.10a	-
	A组Group A	-	1.38±0.28b	0.17b	-
	B组Group B	-	2.82±0.60a	0.30a	1.08
	C组Group C	-	1.28±0.41b	0.07a	-
	D组Group D	-	1.43±0.39b	0.13a	0.52
	标准误 SEM	-	0.32	0.027	-
	P值 P-value	-	0.006	0.029	-

试验期 Period	组别 Group	2-乙基己醇 2-ethylhexanol	N,N-二甲基乙酰胺N,N-Dimethylacetamide	苯酚 Phenol	1H-吲哚-3-硫醇 1H-indole-3-thiol
试验前期 Early period (d 1-45)	对照组 Control group	8.41a	22.46a	5.90a	-
	A组Group A	8.13a	19.86b	4.42b	-
	B组Group B	8.0a	19.93b	4.31b	0.16
	C组Group C	7.39b	18.86b	3.71b	-
	D组Group D	7.76ab	19.31b	3.99b	-
	标准误 SEM	0.02	0.42	0.24	-
	P值 P-value	0.047	0.042	0.031	-
试验后期 Later period (d 46- 90)	对照组 Control group	-	3.38a	1.36a	1.47 a
	A组Group A	-	2.23ab	1.10ab	0.61b
	B组Group B	-	2.28ab	1.16ab	0.78a
	C组Group C	-	1.36b	0.60b	0.26b
	D组Group D	-	1.9b	0.85b	0.46b
	标准误 SEM	-	0.22	0.08	0.14
	P值 P-value	-	0.031	0.012	0.047

[1]	刘玉芳,陈玉林,周祖阳,储明星. miR-221-3p靶向BCL2L11调控小尾寒羊卵泡颗粒细胞凋亡[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(9): 1868-1876.
[2]	董复成,马淑丽,时娟娟,张俊梅,崔岩,任有蛇,张春香. LCN5蛋白在雄性绵羊生殖器官及精子中的表达定位[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(7): 1445-1457.
[3]	李恒,字向东,王会,熊燕,吕明杰,刘宇,蒋旭东. 基于全基因组重测序的山羊产羔数性状关键调控基因的筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(23): 4753-4768.
[4]	宋淑珍, 高良霜, 李宏, 宫旭胤, 刘立山, 魏玉兵. 相对饲养水平对绵羊肌肉组织结构及肌纤维组成相关基因的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(21): 4304-4314.
[5]	苏媛媛,张德权,古明辉,张春娟,李少博,郑晓春,陈丽. 不同来源ATP表征冷鲜羊肉新鲜度[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(19): 3841-3853.
[6]	葛岳,张德权,李少博,陈丽,郑晓春,梁策,颜统晶,李金活,王振宇. 基于消费者喜好性评价宰后不同阶段羊肉食用品质差异[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(18): 3640-3651.
[7]	张春桃,马涛,屠焰,刁其玉. 昼夜节律与肉羊养分消化代谢和瘤胃发酵参数的关联[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(18): 3664-3674.
[8]	刘旺景,唐德富,敖长金. 沙葱及其提取物对小尾寒羊生产性能、胴体特征、肉品质和血清生化指标的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(17): 3461-3472.
[9]	颜统晶,张德权,李欣,刘欢,方菲,刘珊珊,王素,侯成立. 超快速冷却对冷鲜羊肉风味品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(15): 3029-3041.
[10]	陈志敏,常文环,郑爱娟,蔡辉益,刘国华. 饲粮中添加膨化羽毛粉对肉鸡生长性能、屠宰性能和血清生化指标的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(13): 2643-2653.
[11]	张卫东,郑玉杰,葛伟,张月朗,李芳,王昕. 单细胞测序对绒山羊毛乳头细胞的鉴定[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(12): 2436-2446.
[12]	梁鹏,张天闻,孟科,邵顺成,邹诗凡,荣轩,强浩,冯登侦. 绵羊ADIPOQ多态性与生长性状的关联分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(11): 2239-2256.
[13]	郭丰辉,丁勇,纪磊,李贤松,李西良,侯向阳. 羊草克隆后代对刈割处理的响应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(11): 2257-2264.
[14]	柯娜,郝志云,王建清,甄慧敏,罗玉柱,胡江,刘秀,李少斌,赵志东,黄兆春,梁维炜,王继卿. miR-221靶向IRS1抑制绵羊乳腺上皮细胞活力和增殖[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(10): 2047-2056.
[15]	杜宇,王永,孟庆勇,朱江江,林亚秋. 干扰山羊KLF12促进皮下脂肪细胞分化[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(1): 184-196.