Evaluation of relative biological efficiency of additives in sugarcane ensiling

Abstract

-The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of adding alkalis on the fermentative pattern, aerobic stability and nutritive value of the sugarcane silage. A completely randomized design with 6 additives in two concentrations (1 or 2%), plus a control group, totalizing 13 treatments [(6×2)+1] with four replications, was used. The additives were sodium hydroxide (NaOH), limestone (CaCO 3 ), urea (CO(NH 2 ) 2 ), sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO 3 ), quicklime (CaO) and hydrated lime (Ca(OH) 2 ). The material was ensiled in 52 laboratory silos using plastic buckets with 12 L of capacity.Silos were opened 60 days after ensiling, when organic acids concentration, aerobic stability and chemical composition were determined. The Relative Biological Efficiency (RBE) was calculated by the slope ratio method, using the data obtained from ratio between desirable and undesirable silage products, according to the equation: D/U ratio = [lactic/(ethanol + acetic + butyric)]. All additives affected dry matter, crude protein, acid detergent fiber, neutral detergent fiber contents and buffering capacity. Except for urea and quicklime, all additives increased the in vitro dry matter digestibility. In general, these additives altered the fermentative pattern of sugarcane silage, inhibiting alcoholic fermentation and improving lactic acid production.The additive that showed the best RBE in relation to sodium hydroxide (100%) was limestone (89.4%). The RBE values of urea, sodium bicarbonate and hydrated lime were 49.2%, 47.7% and 34.3%, respectively.

Silos Experimentais E a Composição Bromatológica De Silagem De Milho E Sorgo

“…Vários estudos utilizam e descrevem silos experimentais inovadores e criativos, dentre eles PVC 50 x 10 cm equipado com válvula de bunsen (TAVARES et al, 2009), sacos plásticos duplos, sobrepostos com capacidade de 20 L, envolvidos com sacos de ráfia (SENGER et al, 2005), baldes plásticos de 252 mm de altura e 245 mm de diâmetro, com 12 L de capacidade (BORGATTI et al, 2012), e saco plástico de 41 cm de largura, 65 cm de altura e 180 micras de espessura (BERTONCELLI et al, 2017). Porém, outros estudos a descrição dos microssilos é apenas parcial como nos estudos de (MUNIZ et al, 2012) e, em outros casos, a descrição não está presente (PINTO et al, 2010).…”