Mixed ration silage containing sugarcane and babassu byproducts as a nutritional alternative for livestock

References

• Agricultural And Food Research Council – AFRC. 1993. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants: an advisory manual prepared by AFRC Technical Committee on responses to nutrients. Wallingford, UK: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau International. 159.
   Google Scholar
• Association Of Official Analytical Chemists. 2012. Official methods of analysis. 19th ed. Gaithersburg: AOAC International.
   Google Scholar
• Bolsen KK, Lin C, Brent CR. 1992. Effect of silage additives on the microbial succession and fermentation process of alfalfa and corn silages. Journal of Dairy Science. 75:3066–3083. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(92)78070-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabral LS, Valadares Filho SC, Detmann E. 2002. Cinética ruminal das frações de carboidratos, produção de gás, digestibilidade in vitro da matéria seca e NDT estimado da silagem de milho com diferentes proporções de grãos. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia. 31:2332–2339. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982002000900023.
   Google Scholar
• Cao Y, Takahashi T, Horiguchi K. 2009. Effects of addition of food by-products on the fermentation quality of a total mixed ration with whole crop rice and its digestibility, preference, and rumen fermentation in sheep. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 151:1–11. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2008.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carvalho FAL, Queiroz MAA, Silva JG, Voltolini TV. 2014. Características fermentativas na ensilagem de cana-de-açúcar com maniçoba. Ciência Rural. 44:2078–2083. doi:10.1590/0103-8478cr20131471.
   Google Scholar
• Cavali J, Pereira OG, Valadares Filho SC, Porto MO, Fernandes FEP, Garcia R. 2010. Mixed sugarcane and elephant grass silages with or without bacterial inoculant. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia. 39:462–470. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982010000300003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniel JLP, Bernardes TB, Jobim CB, Schmidt P, Nussio LG. 2019. Production and utilization of silages in tropical areas with focus on Brazil. Grass and Forage Science. 74:188–200. doi:10.1111/gfs.12417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Detmann E, Souza MA, Valadares Filho SC, Queiroz AC, Berchielli TT, Saliba EOS, Cabral LS, Pina DS, Ladeira MME, AZevedo JAG. 2012. Métodos para análise de alimentos - INCT - Ciência Animal. 1.ed. Visconde do Rio Branco: Suprema. 214.
   Google Scholar
• Dubois M, Gilles KA, Hamilton JK, Rebers PA, Smitch F. 1956. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Analytical Biochemistry. 28:350–356.
   Google Scholar
• França AFS, Oliveira RP, Miyagi ES, Silva AG, Perón HJMC, Basto DC. 2011. Fermentative characteristics of sorghum hybrids ensilage under nitrogen rates. Ciência Animal Brasileira. 12:383–391.
   Google Scholar
• Gomes GMF, Vasconcelos AM, Egito AS, Carneiro JC, Landim AV, Fonteles NLO, Salles HO. 2013. Degradabilidade in situ do bagaço de cana-de-açúcar para pequenos ruminantes de raças naturalizadas do nordeste brasileiro. Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia. 65:1792–1800. doi:10.1590/S0102-09352013000600029.
   Google Scholar
• Guan H, Yan Y, Li X, Li X, Shuai Y, Feng G, Ran QCY, Li Y, Zhang X. 2018. Microbial communities and natural fermentation of corn silages prepared with farm bunker-silo in southwest China. Bioresource Technology. 265:282–290. doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2018.06.018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gusmão JO, Danes MAC, Casagrande DR, Bernardes TC. 2018. Total mixed ration silage containing elephant grass for small-scale dairy farms. Grass and Forage Science. 73:717–726. doi:10.1111/gfs.12357.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibáñez EMA, Martínez GDM, Juárez JAR, Bueno ICS, Vitti AC. 2010. Efeito de enzimas fibrolíticas sobre a degradação microbiana ruminal da fibra de cana-de-açúcar. Ciência Animal Brasileira. 11:1–8.
   Google Scholar
• IBGE. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. 2016. Produção da extração Vegetal e Silvicultura. Rio de Janeiro; [accessed 25 March 2022]. https://ww2.ibge.gov.br/estadosat/temas.php?sigla=ma&tema=extracaovegetal2016.
   Google Scholar
• Jobim CC, Nussio LG, Reis RA, Schmidt P. 2007. Avanços metodológicos na avaliação da qualidade da forragem conservada. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia. 36:101–119. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982007001000013.
   Google Scholar
• KungJrL, Martin R, Lin CJ. 2003. Agronomy monographs. Agronomy Monograph. 42:305–360. doi:10.2134/agronmonogr42.c7.
   Google Scholar
• KungJrL, Shaver RD, Grant RJ, Schimdt RJ. 2018. Silage review: interpretation of chemical, microbial, and organoleptic components of silages. Journal of Dairy Science. 101:4020–4033.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahanna B. 1994. Proper management assures high-quality silage, grains. Feedstuffs. 66:12–56.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald P, Henderson AR, Heron SJE. 1991. The biochemistry of silage. 2nd ed. Mallow: Chalcombe Publications. 340.
   Google Scholar
• Mertens DR, Loften JR. 1980. The effect of starch on forage fiber digestion kinetics in vitro. Journal of Dairy Science. 63:1437–1446. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(80)83101-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miyaji M, Matsuyama H, Nonaka K. 2016. Effect of ensiling process of total mixed ration on fermentation profile, nutrient loss and in situ ruminal degradation characteristics of diet. Animal Science Journal. 88:134–139. doi:10.1111/asj.12610.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moon NJ. 1983. Inhibition of the growth of acid tolerant yeasts by acetate, lactate and propionate and their synergistic mixtures. Journal of Applied Bacteriology. 55:453–460. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.1983.tb01685.x.
   Google Scholar
• Muck RE, Nadeau EMG, McAllister TA, Contreras Govea FE, Santos MC, KungJrL. 2018. Silage review: recent advances and future uses of silage additives. Journal of Dairy Science. 101:3980–4000. doi:10.3168/jds.2017-13839.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council – NRC. 2001. Nutrient requeriments of dairy cattle. 7th ed. Washington, DC: National Academy Science.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council – NRC. 2007. Nutrient requirements of small ruminants: sheep, goats, cervids, and new world camelids. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nocek J. 1988. In situ and other methods to estimate ruminal protein and energy digestibility: a review. Journal of Dairy Science. 71:2051–2069. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(88)79781-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nogueira ARA, Souza GB. 2005. Manual de laboratórios: solo, água, nutrição vegetal, nutrição animal e alimentos. São Carlos: Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. v.1000, p.1–313.
   Google Scholar
• Nussio LG, Schmidt P, Pedroso AF. 2003. Silagem de cana-de-açúcar. In. produção Animal em pastagens, 2003. Piracicaba. Anais … Piracicaba: FEALQ. v.1:187–205.
   Google Scholar
• Ørskov ER, McDonald I. 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. The Journal of Agricultural Science. 92:499–503. doi:10.1017/S0021859600063048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pahlow G, Muck RE, Driehuis F. 2003. Oude elferink SJWH, spoelstra SF. microbiology of ensiling. In: Buxton DR, Muck RE., Harrison JH., editor. Silage science and technology. Madison, USA: American Society of Agronomy; p. 31–93. (Agronomy Series, 42).
   Google Scholar
• Pedroso AF, Nussio LG, Loures DRS, Paziani SF. 2011. Efeito do tratamento com aditivos químicos e inoculantes bacterianos nas perdas e na qualidade de silagens de cana-de-açúcar. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia. 36:558–564. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982007000300006.
   Google Scholar
• Playne MJ, McDonald PT. 1966. The buffering constituents of herbage and of silage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 17:264–268. doi:10.1002/jsfa.2740170609.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabelo CHS, Härter CJ, Ávila CLDS, Reis RA. 2019. Meta-analysis of the effects of lactobacillus plantarum and lactobacillus buchneri on fermentation, chemical composition and aerobic stability of sugarcane silage. Grassland Science. 65:3–12. doi:10.1111/grs.12215.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ranjit NK, KungJrL. 2000. The effect of lactobacillus buchneri, lactobacillus plantarum, or a chemical preservative on the fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage. Journal of Dairy Science. 83:526–535.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rezende AV, Evangelista AR, Siqueira DR, Santos RV, Mazo MS. 2002. Efeito da mistura da planta de girassol (helianthus annuus L.), durante a ensilagem do capim-elefante (pennisetum purpureum schum.) no valor nutritivo da silagem. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia. 31:1938–1943. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982002000800009.
   Google Scholar
• Robertson JB, Van Soest PJ. 1981. The detergent system of analysis and its 579 application to humam foods. In: Theander O., editor. The analysis of dietary fiber in food, eds. james, 580 W.P.T. New York: Marcel Dekker; p. 123–158.
   Google Scholar
• Roth G, Undersander D. 1995. Silage additives. In: Corn silage production management and feeding. Madison: American Society of Agronomy/Crop Science Society of America/Soil Science Society of America; p. 27–29.
   Google Scholar
• Sampaio IBM. 1988. Experimental designs and modeling techniques in the study of roughage degradation in rumen and growth of ruminants. University of Reading: Reading. 214. Tese (Doctor in Physiology) – University of Reading.
   Google Scholar
• Sampaio IBM. 1997. Métodos estatísticos aplicados à determinação de digestibilidade in situ. In: Teixeira J. C., editor. Digestibilidade em ruminantes. Lavras: UFLA; p. 165–178.
   Google Scholar
• Sá Neto A, Nussio LG, Zopollato M, Junges D, Bispo W. 2013. Silagem de milho ou de cana-de-açúcar com lactobacillus buchneri exclusivamente ou em associação com L. plantarum. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira. 48:528–535. doi:10.1590/S0100-204X2013000500009.
   Google Scholar
• Santos WCC, Nascimento WG, Magalhães ALR, Silva DKA, Silva WJCS, Santana AVS, Soares GSC. 2015. Nutritive value, total losses of dry matter and aerobic stability of the silage from three varieties of sugarcane treated with commercial microbial additives. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 204:1–8. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2015.03.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt P, Nussio LG, Zopollatto M, Ribeiro JL, Santos VP, Pires AV. 2007. Aditivos químicos ou biológicos na ensilagem de cana-de-açúcar: 2. parâmetros ruminais e degradabilidade da matéria seca e das frações fibrosas. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia. 36:1676–1684. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982007000700028.
   Google Scholar
• Siegfried VR, Ruckemann H, Stumpf G. 1984. Method for the determination of organic acids in silage by high performance liquid chromatography. Landwirtschaftliche Forsch. 37:298–304.
   Google Scholar
• Silva JS, Santos ML, Silva Filho EC, Carvalho MGFM, Nunes LCC. 2019. Subprodutos do babaçu (orbignya ssp) como novos matérias adsortivos: uma revisão. Revista Matéria. 24:1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Sniffen CJ, ÓConnor JD, Van Soest PJ, Fox DG, Russel JB. 1992. A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets: II. carbohydrate and protein availability. Journal of Animal Science. 70:3562–3577. doi:10.2527/1992.70113562x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statistical Analysis Systems. SAS. 2002. Statistical Analysis Systems user’s guide: statistics, version 8. SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Tonani FL, Ruggieri AC, Queiroz AC, Andrade P. 2001. Degradabilidade ruminal in situ da matéria seca e da fibra em detergente neutro em silagens de híbridos de sorgo colhidos em diferentes épocas. Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia. 53:100–104. doi:10.1590/S0102-09352001000100016.
   Google Scholar
• Van Soest PJ. 1963. Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous feeds. II. A rapid method for the determination of fiber and lignin. Journal of AOAC International. 46:829–835. doi:10.1093/jaoac/46.5.829.
   Google Scholar
• Van Soest PJ. 1994. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. 2nd ed. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 476.
   Google Scholar
• Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science. 74:3583–3597.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldo DR, Smith LW, Cox EL. 1972. Model of cellulose disappearance from the rumen. Journal of Dairy Science. 55:125–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinberg ZG, Chen Y, Miron D, Raviv Y, Nahim E, Bloch A, Miron J. 2011. Preservation of total mixed rations for dairy cows in bales wrapped with polyethylene stretch film – a commercial scale experiment. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 164:125–129. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2010.11.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woolford MK. 1984. The silage fermentation. New York: Marcel Dekker inc. 350.
   Google Scholar
• Zanine AM, Sene OA, Ferreira DJ, Parente HN, Parente MOM, Pinho RMA, Santos EM, Nascimento TVC, Lima AGVO, Perazzo AF, et al. 2020. Fermentative profile, losses and chemical composition of silage soybean genotypes amended with sugarcane levels. Scientific Reports. 10:21064. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-78217-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar