Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Pedroso,André de Faria
Data de Publicação: 2014
Outros Autores: Pedroso,Alexandre Mendonça, Barioni Júnior,Waldomiro, Souza,Gilberto Batista de
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-35982014000400169
Resumo: The objective was to evaluate the effects of laboratory-silo type and method of silage extract production, respectively, on sugarcane silage fermentation and recovery of fermentation products. Sugarcane was mechanically harvested and ensiled in three different types of laboratory silos (five replicates): 9.7 × 30 cm PVC tubes with tight lids, equipped or unequipped with Bunsen valves, and 20 L plastic buckets with tight lids and Bunsen valves. Three methods were used to produce silage extracts for pH, ethanol, acetic and lactic acids determination: extraction of silage juice by a hydraulic press and production of water extracts using a stomacher or a blender. Total dry matter loss (231 g/kg DM) was not affected by silo type. No interactions between silo type and method of silage extract production were observed for ethanol and organic acids contents in the silages. Interaction between silo type and method of silage extract preparation was detected for pH. Silo type affected ethanol content but did not affect lactic and acetic acids concentration in the silages. Dry matter, crude protein, neutral detergent fiber and ash were not affected by silo type. The method used to produce silage extracts affected the recovery of all fermentation products analyzed in the silages. Recovery of ethanol and acetic acid was higher when silage extracts were produced using a blender. For lactic acid recovery, the hydraulic press method was superior to the other two methods. Silage fermentation pattern is not affected by silo type, but the method used to produce silage extracts and some characteristics of silos affect the recovery of volatile fermentation products.
id SBZ-1_09f8f04c4e2eea1f9e0ebc1d8e0a1866
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1516-35982014000400169
network_acronym_str SBZ-1
network_name_str Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniquesacetic acidethanollaboratory silolactic acidsilage extractsugarcane silageThe objective was to evaluate the effects of laboratory-silo type and method of silage extract production, respectively, on sugarcane silage fermentation and recovery of fermentation products. Sugarcane was mechanically harvested and ensiled in three different types of laboratory silos (five replicates): 9.7 × 30 cm PVC tubes with tight lids, equipped or unequipped with Bunsen valves, and 20 L plastic buckets with tight lids and Bunsen valves. Three methods were used to produce silage extracts for pH, ethanol, acetic and lactic acids determination: extraction of silage juice by a hydraulic press and production of water extracts using a stomacher or a blender. Total dry matter loss (231 g/kg DM) was not affected by silo type. No interactions between silo type and method of silage extract production were observed for ethanol and organic acids contents in the silages. Interaction between silo type and method of silage extract preparation was detected for pH. Silo type affected ethanol content but did not affect lactic and acetic acids concentration in the silages. Dry matter, crude protein, neutral detergent fiber and ash were not affected by silo type. The method used to produce silage extracts affected the recovery of all fermentation products analyzed in the silages. Recovery of ethanol and acetic acid was higher when silage extracts were produced using a blender. For lactic acid recovery, the hydraulic press method was superior to the other two methods. Silage fermentation pattern is not affected by silo type, but the method used to produce silage extracts and some characteristics of silos affect the recovery of volatile fermentation products.Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia2014-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-35982014000400169Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia v.43 n.4 2014reponame:Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia (SBZ)instacron:SBZ10.1590/S1516-35982014000400002info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPedroso,André de FariaPedroso,Alexandre MendonçaBarioni Júnior,WaldomiroSouza,Gilberto Batista deeng2015-10-09T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1516-35982014000400169Revistahttps://www.rbz.org.br/pt-br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||bz@sbz.org.br|| secretariarbz@sbz.org.br1806-92901516-3598opendoar:2015-10-09T00:00Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia (SBZ)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques
title Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques
spellingShingle Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques
Pedroso,André de Faria
acetic acid
ethanol
laboratory silo
lactic acid
silage extract
sugarcane silage
title_short Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques
title_full Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques
title_fullStr Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques
title_sort Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques
author Pedroso,André de Faria
author_facet Pedroso,André de Faria
Pedroso,Alexandre Mendonça
Barioni Júnior,Waldomiro
Souza,Gilberto Batista de
author_role author
author2 Pedroso,Alexandre Mendonça
Barioni Júnior,Waldomiro
Souza,Gilberto Batista de
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Pedroso,André de Faria
Pedroso,Alexandre Mendonça
Barioni Júnior,Waldomiro
Souza,Gilberto Batista de
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv acetic acid
ethanol
laboratory silo
lactic acid
silage extract
sugarcane silage
topic acetic acid
ethanol
laboratory silo
lactic acid
silage extract
sugarcane silage
description The objective was to evaluate the effects of laboratory-silo type and method of silage extract production, respectively, on sugarcane silage fermentation and recovery of fermentation products. Sugarcane was mechanically harvested and ensiled in three different types of laboratory silos (five replicates): 9.7 × 30 cm PVC tubes with tight lids, equipped or unequipped with Bunsen valves, and 20 L plastic buckets with tight lids and Bunsen valves. Three methods were used to produce silage extracts for pH, ethanol, acetic and lactic acids determination: extraction of silage juice by a hydraulic press and production of water extracts using a stomacher or a blender. Total dry matter loss (231 g/kg DM) was not affected by silo type. No interactions between silo type and method of silage extract production were observed for ethanol and organic acids contents in the silages. Interaction between silo type and method of silage extract preparation was detected for pH. Silo type affected ethanol content but did not affect lactic and acetic acids concentration in the silages. Dry matter, crude protein, neutral detergent fiber and ash were not affected by silo type. The method used to produce silage extracts affected the recovery of all fermentation products analyzed in the silages. Recovery of ethanol and acetic acid was higher when silage extracts were produced using a blender. For lactic acid recovery, the hydraulic press method was superior to the other two methods. Silage fermentation pattern is not affected by silo type, but the method used to produce silage extracts and some characteristics of silos affect the recovery of volatile fermentation products.
publishDate 2014
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2014-04-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-35982014000400169
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-35982014000400169
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S1516-35982014000400002
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia v.43 n.4 2014
reponame:Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia (SBZ)
instacron:SBZ
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia (SBZ)
instacron_str SBZ
institution SBZ
reponame_str Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia (Online)
collection Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia (SBZ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||bz@sbz.org.br|| secretariarbz@sbz.org.br
_version_ 1750318150993313792