Cellulose Degradation by Enzymes Added to Ensiled Forages

Leatherwood, J. M.; Mochrie, R.D.; Stone, Edward J.; Thomas, W. E.

doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(63)88985-7

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even with grass rich in WSC, the silage produced with cellulolytic enzymes had a higher L/A ratio than wellpreserved untreated silage (Kauramaa et al 1987 b). The positive effect of increased enzyme application on the quality of silage has also been reported by Leatherwood et al (1963) and Autrey et al (1975). When the level of cellulase increased from 0.3 to 0.9 g/kg lucerne, the pH decreased more quickly with higher lactic acid and lower ammonia N content (Hendersson et al 1987).…”

Section: The Fermentation Quality Of the Silagesmentioning

confidence: 70%

“…In agreement with the results of Brolly (1986) and Jacobs and McAllan (1987) enzymes increased effluent losses as compared with FA and especially untreated silage. Leatherwood et al (1963) and Vaisto et al (1978) observed higher amounts of free water in enzyme than in untreated silages. In contrast, no increase in the volume of effluent with enzymes was found by Brolly (1986) with lucerne and Kennedy (1987) with grass silage.…”

Section: In-silo Lossesmentioning

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of cell wall degrading enzymes on the preservation of grass and on the silage intake and digestibility in sheep

Jaakkola

1990

AFSci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments were carried out to study the effects of cell wall degrading enzymes as silage additive. A primary growth of timothy was cut with a mower and picked up with a precision-chop forage harvester in Exp. I (early cut), and harvested as direct-cut with a precision-chop harvester in Exp. II (late cut). The additive treatments were in Exp. I: 1) unwilted formic acid (FA) applied as AIV II (4.5 l/t), 2) wilted untreated, 3) wilted FA (4 l/t), 4) wilted enzyme A (glucose oxidase (GO) + hemicellulase (HC) 150 ml/t + cellulase (C) 200 ml/t), 5) wilted enzyme B (HC 150 ml/t + C 200 ml/t); and in Exp. II: 1) untreated, 2) FA (4 l/t), 3) E200 (C 200 ml/t + GO), 4) E400 (C 400 ml/t + GO), 5) E800 (C 800 ml/t + GO). The rate of application of GO was 50 000 IU/t. The silages were ensiled in pilot scale silos (3 m3) and the voluntary intake and digestibility in sheep were determined in two experiments designed as a 5 x 5 Latin square. The use of enzymes decreased the fibre content of silages, mainly the cellulose fraction, as compared with FA and untreated silages. Enzyme silages were well preserved with a low pH (3.93—4.15), moderate ammonia N (72—119 g/kg total N) and no butyric acid. As compared with untreated silages (mean pH 4.6, ammonia N 131) the preservation was improved. The FA silages were also well preserved (pH 4.0, ammonia N 57) with more restricted fermentation than enzyme silages. FA and especially higher levels of enzymes increased the amount of effluent. In Exp. I, the digestibilities of dry matter (DM), organic matter (OM) and crude fibre were not significantly (P>0.05) affected by the silage treatment. In Exp. II, the digestibility of DM and OM decreased linearly (P

show abstract

Section: The Fermentation Quality Of the Silagesmentioning

confidence: 70%

Section: In-silo Lossesmentioning

confidence: 91%

The effect of cell wall degrading enzymes on the preservation of grass and on the silage intake and digestibility in sheep

Jaakkola

1990

AFSci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In iaboratory studies, polysaccharidases have improved silage quality and reduced cellulose content (Leatherwood et al 1959(Leatherwood et al , 1963. However, the effect on cell wall content is time-dependent (Autrey et al 1975), and may be affected by forage DM and maturity at ensiling (Van Vurren et al 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of enzyme additives on quality of alfalfa/grass silage and dairy cow performance

Fredeen¹,

McQueen²

1993

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(WSC), ammonia N. acid-detergent fiber N and organic acids, pH, DM disappearance, and temperature changes during ensiling were measured to assess silage quality. Six sheep were also used in a repeated Latin square design to determine digestibility of the second-cut silages. First-cut silage, which contained about 50% timothy, and50% alfalfa was qualiratively similar across treatments except fbr a lower (P < 0.05) concentration of hemicellulose in Grass-treated silage. The only effect (P < 0.05) on quality of second-cut silage. which contained about 80% alfalfa and 20% timothy, was an increase in estimated DM loss in Grass-treated silage compared with Alfa and the control. Despite the negligible effects on silage quality parameters, Grass slightly depressed (P < 0.10) the yield of fat-corrected milk in cows fed first-cut silage, and DM intake of cows fed second-cut forage was elevated slightly (P < 0.05) and fat percent was depressed (P < 0.05) by AIfa relative to the control. Consequently, although the change was small, enzyme treatment of forages may represent a means of reducing the fat percent of milk. Sheep consumed more (P < 0.05) second-cut siiage treated with Alfa, and DM digestibility was higher (P : 0.09) when compared with the control.An enzyme mixture containing amylase may be marginally more eff'ective when forage mixtures contain more alfalfa than timothy.

show abstract

“…The maximum hydrolysis was 29 %. The titratable acidity and the content of reducing compounds were greater in enzyme-treated silages (Leatherwood et al 1963). Autrey et al (1975) added a fungal cellulase from T. reesei to whole maize.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

The use of cellulases for increasing the sugar content of AIV-silage

Vaisto¹,

Heikonen²,

Kreula³

et al. 1978

AFSci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. AIV silages were treated with cellulases. Five different enzyme preparations were compared. The highest amount of reducing sugar in silage was 190 g/kg (dry basis) and the highest amount of glucose in the press juice 24 g/dm B . A combination of two enzyme preparations produced more glucose than any enzyme tested alone. Glucose production was approximately proportional to the enzyme concentration. Because of lactic acid fermentation, cellulase alone could not maintain the sugar content at a high level, a preservative being required to inhibit the lactic acid bacteria. No differences were noted in the glucose contents in silages with different dry matter contents (24-29 %).

show abstract

Cellulose Degradation by Enzymes Added to Ensiled Forages

Cited by 12 publications

References 1 publication

The effect of cell wall degrading enzymes on the preservation of grass and on the silage intake and digestibility in sheep

The effect of cell wall degrading enzymes on the preservation of grass and on the silage intake and digestibility in sheep

Effect of enzyme additives on quality of alfalfa/grass silage and dairy cow performance

The use of cellulases for increasing the sugar content of AIV-silage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About