马铃薯条加工副产品与稻草混贮对奶公牛育肥性能和血液生化指标的影响

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.09.015

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】探究饲粮中不同比例生马铃薯条加工副产品与稻草混贮（以下简称“混贮”）替代全株玉米青贮（以下简称“青贮”）对荷斯坦奶公牛育肥性能、养分表观消化率、瘤胃发酵参数、血液生化指标及经济效益的影响。为马铃薯加工副产品在养牛生产中的利用提供理论依据。【方法】选用60头健康、体况良好、体重相近（（461.33±33.47）kg）的荷斯坦公牛，采用完全随机试验设计，分为4组，每组15个重复，每个重复1头牛；4个处理组为T20组（精料+20%混贮+80%青贮）、T40组（精料+40%混贮+60%青贮）、T60组（精料+60%混贮+40%青贮）和T80组（精料+80%混贮+20%青贮），各试验组饲粮精粗比和精料组成一致，预试期10 d，正试期150 d。【结果】（1）不同比例混贮替代全株玉米青贮，奶公牛的平均日增重（ADG）差异不显著（P>0.05）。T20组干物质采食量（DMI）显著高于其他三组（P<0.01）比T40组提高了4.30%（P<0.01），比T60组提高了5.24%（P<0.01），比T80提高了6.01%（P<0.01）。T40组的料重比（F/G）最低，显著低于其他3组（P<0.05）较T20、T60和T80组分别降低了4.08%（P<0.01）、3.14%（P<0.05）和5.60%（P<0.01）。（2）与T80组相比，前3组饲粮干物质（DM）、中性洗涤纤维（NDF）、酸性洗涤纤维（ADF）、粗脂肪（EE）的表观消化率显著提高（P<0.05）。T20组粗蛋白（CP）的表观消化率显著高于T60和T80组（P<0.05），与T40组差异不显著（P>0.05）。（3）提高饲粮中混贮比例，不影响各组瘤胃pH、丙酸和丁酸含量（P>0.05）。但T60和T80组氨态氮（NH₃-N）和总挥发性脂肪酸（TVFA）浓度显著低于T20组（P<0.05），乙酸含量显著高于T20组（P<0.01）。T80组的乙酸/丙酸比显著高于T20和T40组（P<0.05）。（4）T20组白蛋白（ALB）含量显著高于T60和T80组（P<0.05），T80组尿素氮（UN）浓度极显著升高（P<0.01），较T20、T40和T60组分别升高了29.05%、20.96%和11.31%，T20组的葡萄糖（GLU）浓度显著高于T60和T80组（P<0.01），与T40组差异不显著（P>0.05）。（5）T40组的经济效益最高（17.96元/（天·头）），其次是T20（16.91元/（天·头））、T60（16.79元/（天·头））和T80组（15.91元/（天·头））。【结论】随着混贮替代青贮的比例增加，奶公牛的养分消化率、瘤胃发酵及血液生化指标会有一定影响，替代40%全株玉米青贮时，生产性能表现最佳，经济效益最高。

关键词: 荷斯坦奶公牛, 马铃薯, 稻草, 全株玉米青贮, 育肥性能

Abstract:

【Objective】The purpose of this experiment was to explore the effects of different proportions of mixed silage of raw potato chips processing by product with rice straw (hereinafter referred to as “mixed storage”) instead of whole plant corn silage (hereinafter referred to as “silage”) on fattening performance, nutrient apparent digestibility, rumen fermentation parameters, blood biochemical indexes and economic benefits of Holstein bulls, so as to provide a theoretical basis for the use of potato processing by-products in cattle production.【Method】Sixty healthy Holstein bulls with similar body weight ((461.33 ± 33.47) kg) were randomly divided into four groups with 15 replicates in each group and one bull per replicate, including T20 group (concentrate + 20% mixed silage + 80% silage), T40 group (concentrate + 40% mixed silage + 60% silage), T60 group (concentrate + 60% mixed silage + 40% silage), and T80 group (concentrate + 80% mixed silage + 20% silage). The ratio of concentrate to roughage and the composition of concentrate were the same in the experimental group. Adaptation and experimental periods lasted for 10 and 150 d, respectively.【Result】(1) there was no significant difference in average daily gain (ADG) of Holstein bulls with different proportions of mixed silage instead of whole plant maize silage (P>0.05). The dry matter intake (DMI) of T20 group was 4.30% higher than that of T40 group (P<0.01), 5.24% higher than that of T60 group (P<0.01), and 6.01% higher than that of T80 group (P<0.01). The feed gain ratio (F/G) of T40 group was the lowest, which was 4.08% (P<0.01), 3.14% (P<0.05), and 5.60% (P<0.01) lower than that of T20, T60, and T80 groups, respectively. (2) Compared with T80 group, the apparent digestibility of dry matter (DM), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF) and ether extract (EE) of the first three groups were significantly increased (P<0.05). The apparent digestibility of crude protein (CP) of T20 group was significantly higher than that of T60 and T80 groups (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between T20 group and T40 group (P>0.05). (3) The rumen pH, propionic acid and butyric acid contents were not affected by increasing the proportion of mixed storage (P>0.05). However, the concentrations of ammonia nitrogen (NH₃-N) and total volatile fatty acids (TVFA) of T60 and T80 groups were significantly lower than those of T20 group (P<0.05), and the content of acetic acid was significantly higher than that of T20 group (P<0.01). The ratio of acetic acid to propionic acid of T80 group was significantly higher than that of T20 and T40 groups (P<0.05). (4) Albumin (ALB) content of T20 group was significantly higher than that of T60 and T80 groups (P<0.05). Urea nitrogen (UN) concentration of T80 group was significantly increased (P<0.01), 29.05%, 20.96% and 11.31% higher than that of T20, T40 and T60 groups, respectively. Glucose (Glu) concentration of T20 group was significantly higher than that of T60 and T80 groups (P<0.01), and there was no significant difference between T20 group and T40 group (P>0.05). (5) The economic benefit of T40 group was the highest (17.96 yuan·head^-1·d^-1), followed by T20 (16.91 yuan·head^-1·d^-1), T60 (16.79 yuan·head^-1·d^-1) and T80 (15.91 yuan·head^-1·d^-1).【Conclusion】In conclusion, with the increase of the proportion of mixed silage instead of silage, the digestibility of nutrients, rumen fermentation and blood biochemical indexes would be affected to some extent. When replacing 40% whole plant maize silage, the production performance was the best and the economic benefit was the highest.

Key words: Holstein bull, potato, rice straw, whole maize silage, fattening performance

温媛媛, 李妍, 李建国, 王美美, 于长辉, 沈宜钊, 高艳霞, 李秋凤, 曹玉凤. 马铃薯条加工副产品与稻草混贮对奶公牛育肥性能和血液生化指标的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(9): 1800-1812.

WEN YuanYuan, LI Yan, LI JianGuo, WANG MeiMei, YU ChangHui, SHEN YiZhao, GAO YanXia, LI QiuFeng, CAO YuFeng. Effects of Holstein Bulls Fed Mixed Silage of Potato Chips Processing by Product with Rice Straw on Fattening Performance and Blood Biochemical Indexes[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2023, 56(9): 1800-1812.

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.0578-1752.2023.09.015

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2023/V56/I9/1800

图/表 7

表1

表2

饲粮配方及营养水平（干物质基础）"

项目 Item	前期Prior period				后期Late period
项目 Item	T20	T40	T60	T80	T20	T40	T60	T80
马铃薯条 Potato chips	10.00	10.00	10.00	10.00	5.80	5.80	5.80	5.80
高湿玉米High moisture maize	32.00	32.00	32.00	32.00	45.75	45.75	45.75	45.75
棉粕Cottonseed meal	5.55	5.55	5.55	5.55	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
全棉籽Cottonseed	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	6.00	6.00	6.00	6.00
喷浆玉米皮Spouting maize bran	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77
豆粕Soybean meal	5.60	5.60	5.60	5.60	5.60	5.60	5.60	5.60
干酒糟及其可溶物DDGS	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00	3.00
石粉Limestone	0.49	0.49	0.49	0.49	0.49	0.49	0.49	0.49
磷酸氢钙CaHPO₄	0.34	0.34	0.34	0.34	0.34	0.34	0.34	0.34
预混料Premix¹⁾	0.35	0.35	0.35	0.35	0.35	0.35	0.35	0.35
食盐NaCl	0.40	0.40	0.40	0.40	0.40	0.40	0.40	0.40
小苏打NaHCO₃	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00
氧化镁MgO	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50	0.50
马薯条加工副产品与稻草混贮 Mixed silage of potato crisp processing by product with rice straw	7.22	14.44	21.66	28.88	4.80	9.60	14.40	19.20
全株玉米青贮Whole maize silage	28.88	21.66	14.44	7.22	19.20	14.40	9.60	4.80
麦秸Wheat straw	3.90	3.90	3.90	3.90	6.00	6.00	6.00	6.00
合计Total	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00	100.00
精粗比Forage ratio	6:4	6:4	6:4	6:4	7:3	7:3	7:3	7:3
营养水平Nutritional level²⁾
综合净能NEmf (MJ·kg^-1)	6.81	6.77	6.73	6.70	6.99	6.96	6.94	6.91
粗蛋白Crude protein (CP)	12.72	12.76	12.80	12.85	11.65	11.68	11.71	11.74
中性洗涤纤维Neutral detergent fiber (NDF)	33.74	34.27	34.81	35.34	32.41	32.77	33.12	33.48
酸性洗涤纤维Acid detergent fiber (ADF)	18.86	19.04	18.95	18.86	18.87	18.81	18.74	18.68
钙Calcium (Ca)	0.58	0.60	0.62	0.64	0.55	0.56	0.57	0.59
磷Phosphorus (P)	0.37	0.37	0.37	0.37	0.35	0.35	0.35	0.35
钙/磷Calcium/Phosphorus	1.57	1.62	1.67	1.73	1.57	1.60	1.63	1.69

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

表7

参考文献 54

[1]	曹兵海, 张越杰, 李俊雅, 王之盛, 郭爱珍, 刘继军, 罗欣. 2019年度肉牛牦牛产业技术发展报告. 中国畜牧业, 2020(10): 16-21.
	CAO B H, ZHANG Y J, LI J Y, WANG Z S, GUO A Z, LIU J J, LUO X. Report on industrial technology development of beef cattle and yak in 2019. China Animal Industry, 2020(10): 16-21. (in Chinese)
[2]	曹兵海, 张越杰, 李俊雅, 王之盛, 郭爱珍, 刘继军, 罗欣. 2020年度肉牛牦牛产业技术发展报告. 中国畜牧杂志, 2021, 57(3): 240-245.
	CAO B H, ZHANG Y J, LI J Y, WANG Z S, GUO A Z, LIU J J, LUO X. Report on industrial technology development of beef cattle and yak in 2020. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2021, 57(3): 240-245. (in Chinese)
[3]	卜登攀, 赵连生, 杜超, 何洋, 杨红杰, 张利宇. 2020年前三季度奶牛生产形势分析及后市展望. 中国畜牧业, 2020(18): 42-43.
	BU D P, ZHAO L S, DU C, HE Y, YANG H J, ZHANG L Y. Analysis of dairy cow production situation in the first three quarters of 2020 and its prospect. China Animal Industry, 2020(18): 42-43. (in Chinese)
[4]	曲永利, 曹剑, 苑炳利, 蒋微. 黑龙江省奶公犊资源利用情况调查. 黑龙江八一农垦大学学报, 2009, 21(5): 27-29, 43.
	QU Y L, CAO J, YUAN B L, JIANG W. Investigation for dairy bull calf resource utilization in Heilongjiang Province. Journal of Heilongjiang Bayi Agricultural University, 2009, 21(5): 27-29, 43. (in Chinese)
[5]	赵洋洋, 李妍, 韩永胜, 王晓玲, 李建国, 高艳霞, 曹玉凤, 李秋凤. 谷饲饲粮粗蛋白质水平对荷斯坦公牛屠宰性能和肉品质的影响. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(2): 431-439. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.02.017
	ZHAO Y Y, LI Y, HAN Y S, WANG X L, LI J G, GAO Y X, CAO Y F, LI Q F. The slaughter characteristics and meat quality of Holstein bulls grain-fed under different dietary crude protein levels. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(2): 431-439. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.02.017
[6]	木泰华, 陈井旺. 中国薯类加工现状与展望. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(9): 1744-1745. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.09.010
	MU T H, CHEN J W. Present situation and prospect of potato processing in China. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(9): 1744-1745. (in Chinese)
[7]	闫晓波. 马铃薯渣和秸秆混合青贮对奶牛生产性能的影响[D]. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2009.
	YAN X B. Effects of mixed silage from potato residues and corn stalks on performance of dairy cows[D]. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University, 2009. (in Chinese)
[8]	OKINE A, HANADA M, AIBIBULA Y, OKAMOTO M. Ensiling of potato pulp with or without bacterial inoculants and its effect on fermentation quality, nutrient composition and nutritive value. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2005, 121(3/4): 329-343. doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.02.032
[9]	ZUNONG M, TUERHONG T, OKAMOTO M, HONGO A, HANADA M. Effects of a potato pulp silage supplement on the composition of milk fatty acids when fed to grazing dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2009, 152(1/2): 81-91. doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2009.04.001
[10]	张瑞娟. 马铃薯淀粉渣裹包青贮对肉羊生产性能影响研究. 甘肃畜牧兽医, 2013, 43(6): 48-49.
	ZHANG R J. Study on the effect of potato starch residue wrapped silage on the production performance of mutton sheep. Gansu Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 2013, 43(6): 48-49. (in Chinese)
[11]	中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. GB/T20806-2006 饲料中中性洗涤纤维(NDF) 的测定. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2007.
	General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China. GB/T 20806-2006. Determination of neutral detergent fiber in feedstuffs. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2007. (in Chinese)
[12]	中华人民共和国农业部. 饲料中酸性洗涤纤维的测定. 北京: 农业出版社, 2008.
	Ministry of Agriculture of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of Acid Detergent Fiber in Feedstuffs. Beijing: Agricultural Press, 2008. (in Chinese)
[13]	中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. GB /T 6433—2006 饲料中粗脂肪的测定. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2016.
	General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China. GB/T 6433-2006. Determination of Crude Fat in Feedstuffs. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2016. (in Chinese)
[14]	中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局. GB/T 6436-2002饲料中钙的测定. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2002.
	General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of calcium in feedstuffs (GB/T 6436-2002). Beijing: China Standards Press, 2002. (in Chinese)
[15]	中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局. GB/T 6437-2002 饲料中磷的测定. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2002.
	General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China. Determination of phosphorus in feedstuffs (GB/T6437-2002). Beijing: China Standards Press, 2002. (in Chinese)
[16]	国家技术监督局. GB/T6432—1994 饲料中粗蛋白测定方法. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 1994.
	State Bureau of Technical Supervision of China(CSBTS). GB/ T6432-1994. Method for the Determination of crude protein in feedstuffs. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 1994. (in Chinese)
[17]	冯宗慈, 高民. 通过比色测定瘤胃液氨氮含量方法的改进. 内蒙古畜牧科学, 1993, 14(4): 40-41.
	FENG Z C, GAO M. Improvement of determination of ammonia nitrogen content in rumen fluid by colorimetric method. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 1993, 14(4): 40-41. (in Chinese)
[18]	ERWIN E S, MARCO G J, EMERY E M. Volatile fatty acid analyses of blood and rumen fluid by gas chromatography. Journal of Dairy Science, 1961, 44(9): 1768-1771. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(61)89956-6
[19]	黄文琴, 吕小康, 庄一民, 崔凯, 王世琴, 刁其玉, 张乃锋. 早期断奶和育肥期饲粮NDF水平对湖羊生长性能和消化代谢的影响. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(10): 2217-2228. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.10.017
	HUANG W Q, LÜ X K, ZHUANG Y M, CUI K, WANG S Q, DIAO Q Y, ZHANG N F. The effects of early weaning and NDF levels of finishing diets on growth performance, nutrient digestion and metabolism of Hu lambs. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2021, 54(10): 2217-2228. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.10.017
[20]	张阳. 日粮中粗饲料长度对肉羊行为、瘤胃发酵和生产性能的影响[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2018.
	ZHANG Y. Effect of roughage particle on behavior, rumen fermentation and production performance of sheep[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2018. (in Chinese)
[21]	李美鑫, 张爱忠, 姜宁, 叶明, 陈勇, 焦镭. 粗饲料长度对反刍动物的营养调控. 饲料博览, 2015(5): 19-22.
	LI M X, ZHANG A Z, JIANG N, YE M, CHEN Y, JIAO L. Nutrition regulation of the length of roughage on ruminant. Feed Review, 2015(5): 19-22. (in Chinese)
[22]	张美琦, 刘桃桃, 温媛媛, 李树静, 高艳霞, 李建国, 曹玉凤, 李秋凤. 日粮能量水平对体质量500 kg荷斯坦阉牛生产性能和血清生化指标的影响. 中国兽医学报, 2020, 40(8): 1604-1609, 1615.
	ZHANG M Q, LIU T T, WEN Y Y, LI S J, GAO Y X, LI J G, CAO Y F, LI Q F. Effects of dietary energy levels on performance and serum biochemical parameters of 500 kg Holstein steers. Chinese Journal of Veterinary Science, 2020, 40(8): 1604-1609, 1615. (in Chinese)
[23]	刘爽. 日粮能量、蛋白水平对架子牛生产性能和血液指标的影响[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北农业大学, 2016.
	LIU S. Effects of dietary energy and protein levels on growth performance and serum biochemical indices in beef cattle[D]. Harbin:Northeast Agricultural University, 2016. (in Chinese)
[24]	李妍, 韩肖敏, 李建国, 李秋凤, 高艳霞, 曹玉凤, 李运起. 体外法评价玉米秸秆、谷草和玉米秸秆青贮饲料组合效应研究. 草业学报, 2017, 26(5): 213-223. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2016276
	LI Y, HAN X M, LI J G, LI Q F, GAO Y X, CAO Y F, LI Y Q. Associative effects of cornstalk, millet straw, and corn stalk on silage digestibility in vitro. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26(5): 213-223. (in Chinese)
[25]	杨义, 袁玖, 杨喜喜, 王珍霞, 赵海碧, 王彦乾, 赵海文, 霍润明, 刘学伟, 万欣杰. 荞麦秸秆、大豆秸秆、冰草配比苜蓿对绵羊饲粮组合效应研究. 畜牧兽医杂志, 2018, 37(3): 12-16.
	YANG Y, YUAN J, YANG X X, WANG Z X, ZHAO H B, WANG Y Q, ZHAO H W, HUO R M, LIU X W, WAN X J. Research on associative effects on alfalfa supplementation with buckwheat straw, soybean straw and wheatgrass in diets. Journal of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2018, 37(3): 12-16. (in Chinese)
[26]	高立鹏, 涂远璐, 白云峰, 孟梅娟, 宋谦. 日粮中不同纤维来源对山羊生长性能及养分消化率的影响. 饲料研究, 2015(20): 33-36. doi:10.13557/j.cnki.issn1002-2813.2015.20.009. doi: 10.13557/j.cnki.issn1002-2813.2015.20.009
	GAO L P, TU Y L, BAI Y F, MENG M J, SONG Q. Effects of different dietary fiber sources on growth performance and nutrient digestibility of goats. Feed Research, 2015(20): 33-36. doi:10.13557/j.cnki.issn1002-2813.2015.20.009. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13557/j.cnki.issn1002-2813.2015.20.009
[27]	胡琳, 王定发, 李韦, 周璐丽, 李茂, 周汉林. 日粮中添加不同比例木薯茎叶对海南黑山羊生长性能、血清生化指标和养分表观消化率的影响. 中国畜牧兽医, 2016, 43(12): 3193-3199.
	HU L, WANG D F, LI W, ZHOU L L, LI M, ZHOU H L. Effects of different proportions of cassava stem and leaf in diets on growth performance, serum biochemistry index and nutrient apparent digestibility of Hainan black goat. China Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Medicine, 2016, 43(12): 3193-3199. (in Chinese)
[28]	DE ALMEIDA G A P, DE ANDRADE FERREIRA M, DE LIMA SILVA J, CHAGAS J C C, VÉRAS A S C, DE BARROS L J A, DE ALMEIDA G L P. Sugarcane bagasse as exclusive roughage for dairy cows in smallholder livestock system. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2018, 31(3): 379-385. doi: 10.5713/ajas.17.0205 pmid: 29059720
[29]	刘远, 吴贤锋, 黄勤楼, 李文杨. 饲粮中不同青贮笋壳替代比例对肉羊消化代谢的影响. 动物营养学报, 2020, 32(12): 5712-5723. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2020.12.025
	LIU Y, WU X F, HUANG Q L, LI W Y. Effects of different substitution ratios of bamboo shoot shell silage in diets on digestion and metabolism of mutton sheep. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2020, 32(12): 5712-5723. (in Chinese)
[30]	毛翠, 刘方圆, 宋恩亮, 王亚芳, 王永军, 战翔, 李原, 成海建, 姜富贵. 不同乳酸菌添加量和发酵时间对全株玉米青贮营养价值及发酵品质的影响. 草业学报, 2020, 29(10): 172-181. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2019569
	MAO C, LIU F Y, SONG E L, WANG Y F, WANG Y J, ZHAN X, LI Y, CHENG H J, JIANG F G. Effects of lactic acid bacteria inoculant level and ensiling time on nutritional value and fermentation quality of whole-crop maize silage. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(10): 172-181. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11686/cyxb2019569
[31]	权晓琴, 金邦荃, 胡珏, 周焙, 周鑫, 刘春泉, 李大婧, 刘琛. 乳熟期甜玉米芯纤维管微结构与成分的比较性研究. 南京师范大学学报(工程技术版), 2015, 15(1): 86-92.
	QUAN X Q, JIN B Q, HU J, ZHOU B, ZHOU X, LIU C Q, LI D J, LIU C. Comparison study on the change of fiber tube structure and components of sweet corncob in milk stage. Journal of Nanjing Normal University (Engineering and Technology Edition), 2015, 15(1): 86-92. (in Chinese)
[32]	赵相君, 李琮, 彭何欢, 赵超, 马中青. 液氨和过氧化氢预处理对稻草酶解效果的影响机制. 农业工程学报, 2019, 35(10): 221-226. doi:10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2019.10.028. doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2019.10.028
	ZHAO X J, LI C, PENG H H, ZHAO C, MA Z Q. Mechanism on effect of liquid ammonia and hydrogen peroxide pretreatment on rice straw enzymatic hydrolysis. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2019, 35(10): 221-226. doi:10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2019.10.028. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2019.10.028
[33]	孙雪丽, 李秋凤, 刘英财, 曹玉凤, 王增林, 李艺, 赵洋洋, 葛瀚聪, 刘桃桃, 赵立新. 全株青贮玉米对西门塔尔杂交牛生产性能、表观消化率及血液生化指标的影响. 草业学报, 2018, 27(9): 201-209. doi:10.11686/cyxb2017417. doi: 10.11686/cyxb2017417
	SUN X L, LI Q F, LIU Y C, CAO Y F, WANG Z L, LI Y, ZHAO Y Y, GE H C, LIU T T, ZHAO L X. Effects of whole-plant corn silage on performance, digestibility and blood biochemical parameters in Simmental crossbred bulls. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2018, 27(9): 201-209. doi:10.11686/cyxb2017417. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11686/cyxb2017417
[34]	杨海天, 车东升, 姜海龙, 张奇, 曹康宁, 吴佳勇. 添加发酵玉米秸秆对松辽黑猪养分消化、肉品质及生长性能的影响. 吉林农业大学学报, 2021, 43(6): 727-733.
	YANG H T, CHE D S, JIANG H L, ZHANG Q, CAO K N, WU J Y. Effects of supplementation of fermented corn stalk on nutrient digestibility, meat quality and growth performance of Songliao black swine. Journal of Jilin Agricultural University, 2021, 43(6): 727-733. (in Chinese)
[35]	王世琴, 李冲, 李发弟, 汪晓娟, 王维民, 刘婷. 开食料中性洗涤纤维水平对哺乳羔羊生长性能和消化道发育的影响. 动物营养学报, 2014, 26(8): 2169-2175.
	WANG S Q, LI C, LI F D, WANG X J, WANG W M, LIU T. Effects of neutral detergent fiber level of starter on growth performance and digestive tract development of suckling lambs. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2014, 26(8): 2169-2175. (in Chinese)
[36]	谭支良, 卢德勋, 胡明, 牛文艺, 韩春艳, 任晓萍, 娜仁, 凌树礼. 绵羊日粮中不同碳水化合物比例对瘤胃内环境参数的影响. 动物营养学报, 2000, 12(1): 42-47.
	TAN Z L, LU D X, HU M, NIU W Y, HAN C Y, REN X P, NA R, LING S L. Effects of different proportions of dietarycarbohydrates on the ruminal environmentalparameters for sheep fed a wheat straw based diet. Acta Zoonutrimenta Sinica, 2000, 12(1): 42-47. (in Chinese)
[37]	张杰杰, 赵红波, 游伟, 成海建, 刘晓牧, 万发春, 孙国强, 宋恩亮, 刘倚帆. 饲粮油菜籽添加水平对肉牛生长性能、瘤胃发酵及血液生化指标的影响. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(11): 2233-2241. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.11.017. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.11.017
	ZHANG J J, ZHAO H B, YOU W, CHENG H J, LIU X M, WAN F C, SUN G Q, SONG E L, LIU Y F. Influence of dietary rapeseed levels on growth performance, rumen fermentation characteristics and blood biochemical indices in beef cattle. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2014, 47(11): 2233-2241. doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.11.017. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.11.017
[38]	姜艳美, 王加启, 邓露芳, 卜登攀, 王金枝, 魏宏阳, 周凌云, 雒秋江. 酵母菌培养物对瘤胃发酵的影响. 动物营养学报, 2008, 20(1): 92-97.
	JIANG Y M, WANG J Q, DENG L F, BU D P, WANG J Z, WEI H Y, ZHOU L Y, LUO Q J. Effects of yeast culture on ruminal fermentation. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2008, 20(1): 92-97. (in Chinese)
[39]	张毕阳, 赵桂琴, 焦婷, 柴继宽, 苟智强, 许兴泽, 闫车太. 燕麦干草与全株玉米青贮不同组合对绵羊瘤胃发酵的影响. 动物营养学报, 2017, 29(10): 3563-3573.
	ZHANG B Y, ZHAO G Q, JIAO T, CHAI J K, GOU Z Q, XU X Z, YAN C T. Effects of different combinations of oat hay and whole corn silage on ruminal fermentation of sheep. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2017, 29(10): 3563-3573. (in Chinese)
[40]	宋荣渊, 王洪荣, 王伟, 朱素华, 王剑飞. 不同能氮同步化释放日粮对奶牛瘤胃体外发酵和微生物蛋白合成的影响. 中国奶牛, 2010(5): 7-11. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2010.05.004. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2010.05.004
	SONG R Y, WANG H R, WANG W, ZHU S H, WANG J F. Influence of diet with different nitrogen and energy synchronous release on the ruminal fermentation in vitro and microbial protein synthesis in rumen of dairy cows. China Dairy Cattle, 2010(5): 7-11. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2010.05.004. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4264.2010.05.004
[41]	MCDONALD P, EDWARDS R A. The influence of conservation methods on digestion and utilization of forages by ruminants. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 1976, 35(2): 201-211.
[42]	马吉锋, 于洋, 杨宇为, 梁小军. 不同粗饲料组合的体外发酵效果研究. 饲料研究, 2019, 42(10): 12-17.
	MA J F, YU Y, YANG Y W, LIANG X J. Study on in vitro fermentation effect of different roughage combinations. Feed Research, 2019, 42(10): 12-17. (in Chinese)
[43]	郑玮才, 郝小燕, 张宏祥, 项斌伟, 张文佳, 张春香, 张建新. 饲粮添加酿酒酵母和地衣芽孢杆菌对绵羊生长性能与瘤胃发酵的影响. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(16): 3385-3393. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.16.015
	ZHENG W C, HAO X Y, ZHANG H X, XIANG B W, ZHANG W J, ZHANG C X, ZHANG J X. Effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Bacillus licheniformis on growth performance and rumen fermentation in sheep. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(16): 3385-3393. (in Chinese)
[44]	PENNER G B, OBA M, GÄBEL G, ASCHENBACH J R. A single mild episode of subacute ruminal acidosis does not affect ruminal barrier function in the short term. Journal of Dairy Science, 2010, 93(10): 4838-4845. doi: 10.3168/jds.2010-3406 pmid: 20855017
[45]	黄威. 体外产气法评价青贮大米草与玉米和豆粕的组合效应. 浙江畜牧兽医, 2019, 44(1): 1-5.
	HUANG W. Evaluation of the combined effect of silage Spartina with corn and soybean meal by in vitro gas production method. Zhejiang Journal Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2019, 44(1): 1-5. (in Chinese)
[46]	史鸿鹏, 陈丽红, 司华哲, 刘可园, 南韦肖, 王金铭, 杨乾龙, 李光玉, 孙伟丽. 不同硒添加量对生茸期梅花鹿生产性能、营养物质表观消化率及血清生化指标的影响. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(4): 2235-2244. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2021.04.042
	SHI H P, CHEN L H, SI H Z, LIU K Y, NAN W X, WANG J M, YANG Q L, LI G Y, SUN W L. Effects of different selenium additions on performance, nutrient apparent digestibility and serum biochemical indexes of Sika Deer during antler-growing period. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(4): 2235-2244. (in Chinese)
[47]	ZENG B, SUN J J, CHEN T, SUN B L, HE Q, CHEN X Y, ZHANG Y L, XI Q Y. Effects of Moringa oleifera silage on milk yield, nutrient digestibility and serum biochemical indexes of lactating dairy cows. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 2018, 102(1): 75-81. doi: 10.1111/jpn.2018.102.issue-1
[48]	张峰. 不同氮源对绵羊生长性能、消化代谢及血清生化指标的影响[D]. 保定: 河北农业大学, 2004.
	ZHANG F. Effect of different forms nitrogen source on performance, the digestion and metabolism and blood biochemical materials in sheep[D]. Baoding: Hebei Agricultural University, 2004. (in Chinese)
[49]	赵金标, 宋孝明, 李忠超, 刘岭. 不同的淀粉类型对生长猪饲粮有效能和营养物质消化率的影响. 动物营养学报, 2021, 33(3): 1330-1338. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2021.03.016
	ZHAO J B, SONG X M, LI Z C, LIU L. Effects of different starch types on available energy and nutrient digestibility in growing pigs. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2021, 33(3): 1330-1338. (in Chinese)
[50]	段迎凯, 蒋洪文, 薛白, 王之盛, 邹华围, 赖松家. 瘤胃灌注不同来源淀粉对牦牛瘤胃发酵及血清生化指标的影响. 动物营养学报, 2012, 24(8): 1484-1492. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-267x.2012.08.012
	DUAN Y K, JIANG H W, XUE B, WANG Z S, ZOU H W, LAI S J. Effects of ruminal infusion of different source starches on ruminal fermentation and serum biochemical indexes in yaks. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2012, 24(8): 1484-1492. (in Chinese)
[51]	周玉香, 吕玉玲, 王洁, 吉帅, 侯鹏霞. 血液生化指标在动物生产与营养调控研究中的应用概况. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2012, 33(S1): 72-74.
	ZHOU Y X, LÜ Y L, WANG J, JI S, HOU P X. Application survey of blood biochemical indices in the studies of animal production and nutritional regulation. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2012, 33(S1): 72-74. (in Chinese)
[52]	李胜开. 南方农副产品混合青贮饲料的营养价值评定及对肉牛生长性能和血液生化指标的影响[D]. 南宁: 广西大学, 2017.
	LI S K. Nutritive value evaluation of the southern agricultural mixed silage products and its influence on growth performance and blood biochemical indices in beef cattle[D]. Nanning: Guangxi University, 2017. (in Chinese)
[53]	BÜHLER C, HAMMON H, ROSSI G L, BLUM J W. Small intestinal morphology in eight-day-old calves fed colostrum for different durations or only milk replacer and treated with long-R3-insulin-like growth factor I and growth hormone. Journal of Animal Science, 1998, 76(3): 758-765. pmid: 9535335
[54]	李晓蒙, 李秋凤, 曹玉凤, 高艳霞, 于春起, 杜柳柳, 王晓玲, 李建国. 饲粮能量和蛋白质水平对荷斯坦公牛生长育肥性能及血液生化指标的影响. 动物营养学报, 2015, 27(4): 1252-1261.
	LI X M, LI Q F, CAO Y F, GAO Y X, YU C Q, DU L L, WANG X L, LI J G. Effects of dietary energy and protein levels on growing-fattening performance and blood biochemical indicators of Holstein bulls. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2015, 27(4): 1252-1261. (in Chinese)

项目 Item	马铃薯条加工副产品与稻草混贮 Mixed silage of potato chips processing by product with rice straw	全株玉米青贮 Whole maize silage
粗蛋白Crude protein (CP)	8.90	7.00
粗脂肪Ether extract (EE)	1.69	3.02
淀粉Starch	13.24	31.65
中性洗涤纤维Neutral detergent fiber (NDF)	57.12	48.61
酸性洗涤纤维Acid detergent fiber (ADF)	35.53	26.31
钙Calcium (Ca)	0.42	0.28
磷Phosphorus (P)	0.21	0.19

项目 Item	组别Group				标准误 SEM	P值P value
项目 Item	T20	T40	T60	T80	标准误 SEM	处理 Trt	线性 Linear	二次 Quadratic
初始体重 Initial weight (kg)	461.03±5.67	461.17±8.21	461.49±7.92	462.23±12.34	12.543	0.986	0.922	0.973
最终体重 Final weight (kg)	649.00±12.55	649.33±10.06	642.00±8.46	637.00±11.96	15.389	0.848	0.349	0.805
平均日增重 Average daily gain (kg·d^-1)	1.25±0.56	1.25±0.41	1.20±0.33	1.16±0.64	0.072	0.573	0.183	0.733
干物质采食量 Dry matter intake (kg·d^-1)	11.65±0.11A	11.17±0.09B	11.07±0.08B	10.99±0.07B	0.130	<0.001	<0.001	0.037
料重比 Feed gain ratio	9.32±0.08A	8.94±0.08B	9.23±0.07AB	9.47±0.65A	0.106	<0.001	0.079	<0.001

项目 Item	组别Group				标准误 SEM	P值P value
项目 Item	T20	T40	T60	T80	标准误 SEM	处理 Treatment	线性 Linear	二次 Quadratic
干物质Dry matter (DM)	79.19±2.12a	76.97±1.61a	72.20±3.15a	69.87±1.73b	3.164	0.035	0.005	0.982
粗蛋白Crude protein (CP)	82.15±2.28a	80.68±1.12a	73.77±3.55b	73.99±5.45b	2.698	0.011	0.002	0.661
中性洗涤纤维Neutral detergent fiber (NDF)	62.86±4.36A	63.16±2.30A	55.32±4.65AB	45.19±2.50B	5.102	0.009	0.002	0.167
酸性洗涤纤维Acid detergent fiber (ADF)	57.69±2.82a	57.47±3.01a	50.77±1.74a	46.14±2.98b	3.801	0.020	0.003	0.424
粗脂肪Ether extract (EE)	95.47±0.88a	93.38±0.22a	93.53±1.01a	90.84±1.32b	1.338	0.026	0.005	0.758
钙Calcium (Ca)	57.79±0.93A	54.72±3.10A	49.96±1.81AB	45.30±0.53B	2.648	0.001	<0.001	0.676
磷Phosphorus (P)	67.82±2.87A	62.85±0.79AB	57.65±1.00BC	54.55±1.36BC	2.421	<0.001	<0.001	0.591

项目 Item	组别Group				标准误 SEM	P值P value
项目 Item	T20	T40	T60	T80	标准误 SEM	处理 Treatment	线性 Linear	二次 Quadratic
pH	6.54±0.01	6.71±0.01	6.73±0.14	6.74±0.13	0.117	0.246	0.121	0.254
氨态氮NH₃-N (mg·dL^-1)	10.62±0.49a	10.13±0.53a	7.28±0.54b	5.94±0.42b	0.703	<0.001	<0.001	0.393
总挥发性脂肪酸 Total volatile fatty acids (mmol·L^-1)	88.94±5.46A	85.75±2.19A	69.17±2.99B	68.72±3.52B	5.285	<0.001	<0.001	0.717
乙酸Acetic acid (%)	61.87±1.08B	64.14±0.55AB	64.67±0.47A	65.33±0.24A	0.944	0.005	0.001	0.408
丙酸Propionic acid (%)	21.44±0.72	21.43±0.45	21.29±0.36	20.65±0.26	0.681	0.619	0.254	0.518
丁酸Butyrate (%)	16.69±0.19	14.43±0.64	14.04±0.66	14.02±0.15	1.242	0.114	0.039	0.212
乙酸/丙酸Acetic acid/Propionic acid	2.91±0.01b	2.95±0.08b	3.03±0.05ab	3.17±0.05a	0.100	0.064	0.010	0.469

项目 Item	组别Group				标准误 SEM	P值P value
项目 Item	T20	T40	T60	T80	标准误 SEM	处理 Trt	线性 Linear	二次 Quadratic
白蛋白 Albumi (ALB g·L^-1)	38.71±0.63A	37.22±0.84AB	36.31±0.67AB	34.86±0.40B	0.975	0.003	0.001	0.990
尿素氮 Urea nitrogen (UN mmol·L^-1)	3.89±0.14C	4.15±0.12C	4.51±0.22AB	5.02±0.18A	0.191	<0.001	<0.001	0.353
葡萄糖 Glucose (GLU mmol·L^-1)	4.14±0.05A	3.85±0.05AB	3.66±0.18BC	3.29±0.12C	0.590	<0.001	<0.001	0.738
甘油三酯 Triglyceride (TG mmol·L^-1)	0.26±0.02	0.25±0.02	0.22±0.01	0.21±0.01	0.025	0.148	0.029	0.717
胆固醇 Cholesterol (CHO mmol·L^-1)	3.81±0.10	3.79±0.13	3.68±0.13	3.57±0.15	0.184	0.541	0.161	0.733
生长激素 Growth hormone (GH ng·mL^-1)	20.02±0.12	19.91±0.11	20.04±0.05	20.02±0.02	0.122	0.714	0.724	0.604
胰岛素样生长因子I Insulin-like growth factor (IGF-Ing·mL^-1)	582.19±14.95	603.89±14.00	561.72±28.53	604.34±10.05	28.381	0.391	0.788	0.605