Quality of mixed silages of sorghum, BRS Capiaçu grass, and cactus pear in a semiarid region of Brazil

References

• Agricultural and Food Research Council – AFRC. 1993. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. Walligford: CAB International.
   Google Scholar
• Almeida LGF, Parrella RAC, Simeone MLF, Ribeiro PCO, Santos AS, Costa ASV, Guimarães AG, Schaffert RE. 2019. Composition and growth of sorghum biomass genotypes for ethanol production. Biomass Bioenergy. 122:343–348. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.01.030.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amaral RC, Carvalho BF, Costa DM, Morenz MJF, Schwan RF, Ávila CLS. 2020. Novel lactic acid bacteria strains enhance the conservation of elephant grass silage cv. BRS Capiaçu. Ani Feed Scie Tech. 264:1–15. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2020.114472.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borreani G, Tabacco E, Schmidt RJ, Holmes BJ, Muck RE. 2018. Silage review: factors affecting dry matter and quality losses in silages. J Dairy Sci. 101(5):3952–3979. doi:10.3168/jds.2017-13837.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casali AO, Detmann E, Valadares Filho SC, Pereira JC, Cunha M, Detmann KSC, Paulino MF. 2009. Estimation of fibrous compounds contents in ruminant feeds with bags made from different textiles. Rev Bras Zootec. 38(1):130-138. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982009000100017.
   Google Scholar
• Cordeiro MWS, Rocha Júnior VR, Monção FP, Palma MNN, Rigueira JPS, Carvalho CCS, Costa M, D D, Angelo MFSV, Costa NM, Oliveira LIS. 2023. Tropical grass silages with spineless cactus in diets of Holstein × Zebu heifers in the semiarid region of Brazil. Trop Anim Health Prod. 55(2):89–104. doi:10.1007/s11250-023-03506-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniel JLP, Bernardes TF, Jobim CC, Schmidt P, Nussio LG. 2019. Production and utilization of silages in tropical areas with focus on Brazil. Grass and Forage Sci. 74(2):188–200. doi:10.1111/gfs.12417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Detmann E, Silva LFC, Rocha GC, Palma MNN, Rodrigues JPP. 2021. Métodos para análise de alimentos. 2ª Edição, Visconde do Rio Branco, MG: Suprema, 350 p.
   Google Scholar
• Dubeux Jr JCB, Santos MVF, Cunha MV, Santos DC, Souza RTA, Mello ACL, Souza TC. 2021. Cactus (Opuntia and Nopalea) nutritive value: a review. Ani Feed Scie Tech. 275:1–11. doi.10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2021.114890.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammer O, Harper DAT, Ryan PD. 2001. PAST: Paleontological Statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol Electr. 4:1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Hora FF, Júnior R, Monção VR, Rigueira FP, Cordeiro JPS, Caldeira MWS, Cruz LA, Alencar FNF, Albuquerque AMS, Leal CJB, et al. 2023. Nutritional parameters and performance of crossbred heifers fed with millet and BRS 716 biomass sorghum silages. J Appl Anim Res. 51(1):74–83. doi:10.1080/09712119.2022.2155172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jesus MA, Monção FP, Rigueira JPS, Rocha Júnior VR, Gomes VM, Delvaux Junior NA, Pires DAA, Sales ECJ, Carvalho CCS, Santos AS. 2021. Effects of microbial inoculant and fibrolytic enzymes on fermentation quality and nutritional value of BRS capiaçu grass silage. Semina: Ciênc Agrár. 42(3):1837–1852.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jobim CC, Nussio LG, Reis RA, Schmidt P. 2007. Avanços metodológicos na avaliação da qualidade da forragem conservada. Rev Bras Zootec. 36:101–119. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982007001000013.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson RA, Wichern DW. 2008. Multivariate analysis. New Jersey: Springer Briefs Public Heal. 71–81. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-77203-5_8.
   Google Scholar
• Kaiser HF. 1960. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educ Psychol Meas. 20(1):141–151. doi:10.1177/001316446002000116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Köppen, W. 1948. Climatologia: Con un estudio de los climas de la tierra. Fondo de Cultura Econômica. México.
   Google Scholar
• Kung Jr L, Shaver RD, Grant RJ, Schmidt RJ. 2018. Silage review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial, and organoleptic components of silages. J Dairy Sci, 101(5):4020–4033. doi:10.3168/jds.2017-13909.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee EH, Kim HJ, Song YS, Jin C, Lee KT, Jungsook C, Lee YS. 2003. Constituents of the stems and fruits ofOpuntia ficus-indica var.saboten. Arch Pharm Res. 26:1018–1023. doi:10.1007/BF02994752.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martínez UO, Esparza JR, Fragoso LR. 2014. Cactus (Opuntia ficus-indica): a review on its antioxidants properties and potential pharmacological use in chronic diseases. Nat Prod Chemistry Res. 2:1–8. doi. 10.4172/2329-6836.1000153.
   Google Scholar
• McCary CL, Vyas D, Faciola AP, Ferraretto LF. 2020. Graduate student literature review: current perspectives on whole-plant sorghum silage production and utilization by lactating dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 103(6):5783–5790. doi:10.3168/jds.2019-18122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald P, Henderson AR, Heron S. 1991. The biochemistry of silage, 2nd ed. Marlow: Chalcombe, 340 p.
   Google Scholar
• Monção FP, Costa MAMS, Rigueira JPS, Moura MMA, Rocha Júnior VR, Gomes VM, Leal DB, Maranhão CMA, Albuquerque CJB, Chamone JMA. 2019. Yield and nutritional value of BRS Capiaçu grass at different regrowth ages. Semina. Agrár. 40(5):2045-2055. doi:10.5433/1679-0359.2019v40n5p2045.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monção FP, Costa MAMS, Rigueira JPS, Sales ECJ, Leal DB, Silva MFP, Gomes VM, Chamone JMA, Alves DD, Carvalho CCS, et al. 2020a. Productivity and nutritional value of BRS Capiaçu grass (Pennisetum purpureum) managed at four regrowth ages in a semiarid region. Trop Ani Health Prod. 52:235–241. doi:10.1007/s11250-019-02012-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monção FP, Rocha Júnior VR, Silva JT, Jesus NG, Marques OFC, Rigueira JPS, Sales ECJ, Silva Júnior AAG, Alves DD, Carvalho CCC, et al. 2020b. Nutritional value of BRS Capiaçu grass (Pennisetum purpureum) silage associated with cactus pear. Iranian J Applied Ani Sci, 10(1):25–29
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moran JP, Weinberg ZG, Ashbell G, Hen Y, Owen TR. 1996. A comparison of two methods for the evaluation of the aerobic stability of whole crop wheat silage. In: International silage conference, 11., 1996, Aberystwyth. Proceedings … Aberystwyth: University of Wales Aberystwyth, p.162-163.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council – International [NRC]. 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle, 7th rev. ed. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nocek JE. 1988. In situ and other methods to estimate ruminal protein and energy digestibility: a review. J Dairy Sci. 71(8):2051–2069. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(88)79781-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noel RJ, Hambleton LG. 1976. Collaborative study of a semiautomated method for the determination of crude protein in animal feeds. J AOAC Inter. 59(1):134–140. doi:10.1093/jaoac/59.1.134.
   Google Scholar
• Ortiz-Rodríguez R, Aguilar-Barrera JL, Valdez-Alarcón JJ, Val-Arreola D, Esquivel-Córdoba J, Martínez-Flores HE, Pérez-Sánchez RE. 2016. Effect of adding mucilage from Opuntia ficus indica and Opuntia atropes to raw milk on mesophilic aerobic bacteria and total coliforms. Nova Scientia. 8(16):1–17. doi:10.21640/ns.v8i16.279.
   Google Scholar
• Pastorelli G, Serra V, Vannuccini C, Attard E. 2022. Opuntia spp. as alternative fodder for sustainable livestock production. Animals (Basel). 12(13):1597–1515. doi:10.3390/ani12131597.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pryce JD. 1969. A modification of the Barker-Summerson method for the determination of lactic acid. Analyst. 94:1151–1152. doi:10.1039/an9699401151.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qu H, Liu HB, Dong CF, Lu XY, Shen YX. 2014. Field performance and nutritive value of sweet sorghum in eastern China. Field Crops Res. 157:1–7. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2013.11.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Queiroz FE, Júnior R, Monção VR, Rigueira FP, Silva JPS, Alencar FV, Cordeiro AMS, Gomes MWS, Carvalho VM, Costa CCS, D M. 2021. Effect of replacement of forage sorghum silage with biomass sorghum silage in diets for dairy heifers. Semina: Ciênc Agrár. 43(1):121–140. doi:10.5433/1679-0359.2022v43n1p121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramos JCP, Rocha Júnior VRR, Monção FP, Parrela RAC, Caxito AM, Cordeiro MWS, Hora FP, Pires DAA. 2021. Effect of replacing forage sorghum silage with biomass sorghum silage in diets for F1 Holstein × Zebu lactating cows. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 53(1):1–12. doi:10.1007/s11250-020-02503-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribas WFG, Monção FP, Rocha Júnior VR, Maranhão CMA, Ferreira HC, Santos AS, Gomes VM, Rigueira JPS. 2021. Effect of wilting time and enzymatic-bacterial inoculant on the fermentative profile, aerobic stability, and nutritional value of BRS Capiaçu grass silage. Rev Bras Zootec, 50:1-13. doi. 10.37496/rbz5020200207
   Google Scholar
• Roth G, Undersander D. 1995. Silage additives. In: Corn silage production management and feeding. Madison American Society of Agronomy, 27-29.
   Google Scholar
• Souza IDAS, Rocha Júnior VR, Monção FP, Parrela RAC, Cordeiro MWS, Carvalho CCS, Rigueira JPS, Silva FV, Delvaux Junior NA. 2021. Yield and nutritional value of biomass sorghum (BRS 716) managed in different row spacing and maturity at harvest in the semiarid region of Brazil. Semina: Ciênc Agrár. 42(6):3463–3484. doi:10.5433/1679-0359.2021v42n6p3463.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souza JF, Rigueira JPS, Albuquerque CJB, Júnior R, Santos VR, Carvalho AS, Leal CCS, Mendes DB, Parrella BM, Silva RAC, et al. 2023. Yield and nutritional value of silage of different sorghum hybrids inoculated with Azospirillum brasilense. J Applied Ani Res. 51(1):424–433. doi:10.1080/09712119.2023.2216760.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sucu E, Kalkan H, Canbolat O, Filya I. 2016. Effects of ensiling density on nutritive value of maize and sorghum silages. Rev Bras Zootec. 45(10):596–603. doi:10.1590/S1806-92902016001000003.
   Google Scholar
• Trachtenberg S, Mayer AM. 1981. Composition and properties of Opuntia ficus-indica mucilage. Phytochemistry. 20(12):2665–2668. doi:10.1016/0031-9422(81)85263-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar