三种灌木饲用植物青贮微生物种群动态变化与发酵特性
|
摘要
以内蒙古赤峰市林西县栽培的尖叶胡枝子(Lespedeza hedysaroides (Pall.) Kitag.)、达乌里胡枝子(Lespedeza davurica (Laxm.) Schindl.)和山竹岩黄芪(Hedysarum fruticosum Pall.)三种饲用灌木为材料，进行青贮微生物种群动态变化及发酵特性的研究，主要结论如下：
1.在孕蕾期、初花期和盛花期，三种饲用灌木附生微生物数量有以下特点：乳酸菌、酵母菌、霉菌、大肠杆菌及好氧细菌的数量在孕蕾期最低且相差不多，在102-104cfu/g之间；初花期的酵母菌、霉菌和大肠杆菌数量最高，在107-108cfu/g之间，乳酸菌的数量也有所增加，在104-105cfu/g之间；盛花期，酵母菌、霉菌、大肠杆菌和好氧细菌数量有所下降，大肠杆菌下降明显，达乌里胡枝子乳酸菌数量稍有增加，尖叶胡枝子和山竹岩黄芪中乳酸菌数量有所下降，在初花期和盛花期，对青贮发酵不利的酵母菌和霉菌、好氧细菌和大肠杆菌的数量远多于乳酸菌。
2.三种饲用灌木与中北410玉米混贮试验中，达乌里胡枝子与中北410玉米混贮中乳酸菌和酵母菌、霉菌和好氧细菌的数量随着中北410玉米的含量的增加而逐渐增加，大肠杆菌的数量随着中北410玉米含量的增加显著减少；尖叶胡枝子、山竹岩黄芪混贮也与其相似。
3.三种饲用灌木添加SL和AC青贮试验中，尖叶胡枝子中乳酸菌、酵母菌、霉菌、大肠杆菌及好氧细菌数量达到峰值的时间主要集中在第2、5和10天，而后逐渐减少至平稳，大肠杆菌在青贮30-60天减少尤为明显。达乌里胡枝子和山竹岩黄芪青贮中乳酸菌、酵母菌、霉菌、大肠杆菌及好氧细菌数量变化和尖叶胡枝类似，也分别在第2、5、10天达到最大值，而后乳酸菌、酵母菌和霉菌的数量缓慢下降至平缓，大肠杆菌在达到最大值后一直保持快速下降的趋势。
4.从尖叶胡枝子、达乌里胡枝子和山竹岩黄芪的青贮原料、发酵初期、中期和后期共分离得到67株乳酸菌，分别属于5个属15个菌种。
5.比较分离出的10种乳酸菌产酸能力和生长曲线发现，A33(植物乳杆菌)、A74(鼠李糖乳杆菌)和A29(戊糖片球菌)在发酵12小时后的pH值较低，分别为4.20、4.26和4.40。3株乳酸菌在发酵36h后的吸光值分别为3.01、2.91和2.80，均高于其它7株乳酸菌，生长速度也较快。A33、A74和A29适合做青贮饲料乳酸菌添加剂菌种。
6.根据弗氏Flieg评分法，三种饲用灌木不加添加剂青贮品质均较差，尖叶胡枝子SL0.0005%和SL0.001%+AC0.003%处理的青贮品质为好，其它处理品质为很好；达乌里胡枝子AC0.00075%和SL0.001%+AC0.003%处理得分为好，其它处理得分为很好；山竹岩黄芪SL0.001%、SL0.00025%、AC0.0015%和SL0.001%+AC0.003%处理得分为好，其它为很好。在与中北410玉米混贮中，尖叶胡枝子单贮的青贮品质为好，其它混贮处理得分为很好；达乌里胡枝子单贮的青贮品质为差，混贮评分为很好；山竹岩黄芪单贮青贮品质为好，混贮评分为很好，三种材料与中北410玉米混贮的适宜比例为70%中北410玉米。
7.综合三种评价方法，尖叶胡枝子、达乌里胡枝子和山竹岩黄芪与中北410玉米三种比例混贮的9个处理的乳酸含量最高，无丁酸生成，pH值最低，粗脂肪和可溶性糖含量也较高，青贮质量为优。三种材料单贮的6处理青贮质量为差。尖叶胡枝子、达乌里胡枝子和山竹岩黄芪青贮中添加SL和AC的27个处理对发酵品质均有不同程度改善，但不如混贮效果好。
In this experiment, Lespedeza hedysaroides (Pall.) Kitag., Lespedeza davurica (Laxm.) Schindl.and Hedysarum fruticosum Pall. were chosen to determine the characteristics of microbial flora dynamicchanges and fermentation quality, and main conclusions are as follows:
1. The number of adnascent microorganism on the three species of feeding shrubs in the squaringstage, initial bloom stage and full bloom stage has the following characteristics: The least number oflactic acid bacteria, aerobic bacteria, coliform bacteria, yeast and mold were found in the squaring stage;The largest number of coliform bacteria, yeast and mold were found in initial bloom stage, maximumwere107-108cfu/g, the number of lactic acid bacteria also increased, the number is about105cfu/g; infull bloom stage, counts of coliform bacteria, aerobic bacteria, yeast and mold decreased, moresignificance can be seen by coliform bacteria, counts of lactic acid bacteria increased a little inLespedeza davurica, decreased in Lespedeza hedysaroides and Hedysarum fruticosum. Counts ofadnascent lactic acid bacteria on three materials was far less than harmful microorganisms in initial andfull bloom stage.
2. The number of lactic acid bacteria, aerobic bacteria, yeast and mold gradually increased withincreasing content of corn, counts of coliform bacteria reduced with increasing content of corn in themixed ensiling of three materials and Zea mays L..
3. Lactic acid bacteria, aerobic bacteria, coliform bacteria, yeast and mold reached maximum wasmainly concentrated in2,5and10days, and then gradually reduced to a smooth; counts of coliformbacteria decreased significantly in ensiling30-60days in three materials ensiling with SL and ACaddition.
4. Sixty seven lactic acid bacteria strains were isolated from three materials, the initial and laterfermentation stage. These strains belonged to five genuses and fifteen species.
5. Three lactic acid bacteria strains A33(lactobacillus plantarum), A74(lactobacillus rhamnosus)and A29(pediococcus pentosaceus) were screened for their quicker acid-probuction rate and speed ofgrowth, their pH values were4.20、4.26and4.40after12hours fermentation, their absorbance valueswere3.01、2.91and2.80after36hours fermentation. Three lactic acid bacteria strains were suitable formicroorganism additive.
6. The Flieg evaluation method of silage showed that the fermentation quality was worst in directlyensiled Lespedeza hedysaroides, the treatments with SL0.001%+AC0.003%and SL0.0005%were good,others were excellent; the fermentation quality was worst in directly ensiled Lespedeza davurica, thetreatments with AC0.00075%and SL0.001%+AC0.003%were good, others were excellent and thefermentation quality was worst in directly ensiled Hedysarum fruticosum, the treatments withSL0.00025%, SL0.001%, AC0.0015%and SL0.001%+AC0.003%were good, others were excellent.The Flieg evaluation method of silage showed that the fermentation quality were good in directlyensiled Lespedeza hedysaroides and Hedysarum fruticosum, the fermentation quality was worse in directly ensiled Lespedeza davurica, others were excellent in three materials mixed ensiling with Zeamays L. The suitable mixed silage proportion of three materials and Zea mays L. was the70percent ofZea mays L..
7. Summarized three evaluations, three materials silaged with the three ratios Zea mays L. hadhigher lactic acid content and lower pH value, no butyric acid and the EE and WSC contents werehigher than others, silage quality is excellent. three materials directly ensiled had higher pH, butyricacid content and lower lactic acid content, silage quality is poor. The addition of SL and AC to threematerials improve the fermentation quality in varying degrees, but not as good as mixed silage.
1.在孕蕾期、初花期和盛花期，三种饲用灌木附生微生物数量有以下特点：乳酸菌、酵母菌、霉菌、大肠杆菌及好氧细菌的数量在孕蕾期最低且相差不多，在102-104cfu/g之间；初花期的酵母菌、霉菌和大肠杆菌数量最高，在107-108cfu/g之间，乳酸菌的数量也有所增加，在104-105cfu/g之间；盛花期，酵母菌、霉菌、大肠杆菌和好氧细菌数量有所下降，大肠杆菌下降明显，达乌里胡枝子乳酸菌数量稍有增加，尖叶胡枝子和山竹岩黄芪中乳酸菌数量有所下降，在初花期和盛花期，对青贮发酵不利的酵母菌和霉菌、好氧细菌和大肠杆菌的数量远多于乳酸菌。
2.三种饲用灌木与中北410玉米混贮试验中，达乌里胡枝子与中北410玉米混贮中乳酸菌和酵母菌、霉菌和好氧细菌的数量随着中北410玉米的含量的增加而逐渐增加，大肠杆菌的数量随着中北410玉米含量的增加显著减少；尖叶胡枝子、山竹岩黄芪混贮也与其相似。
3.三种饲用灌木添加SL和AC青贮试验中，尖叶胡枝子中乳酸菌、酵母菌、霉菌、大肠杆菌及好氧细菌数量达到峰值的时间主要集中在第2、5和10天，而后逐渐减少至平稳，大肠杆菌在青贮30-60天减少尤为明显。达乌里胡枝子和山竹岩黄芪青贮中乳酸菌、酵母菌、霉菌、大肠杆菌及好氧细菌数量变化和尖叶胡枝类似，也分别在第2、5、10天达到最大值，而后乳酸菌、酵母菌和霉菌的数量缓慢下降至平缓，大肠杆菌在达到最大值后一直保持快速下降的趋势。
4.从尖叶胡枝子、达乌里胡枝子和山竹岩黄芪的青贮原料、发酵初期、中期和后期共分离得到67株乳酸菌，分别属于5个属15个菌种。
5.比较分离出的10种乳酸菌产酸能力和生长曲线发现，A33(植物乳杆菌)、A74(鼠李糖乳杆菌)和A29(戊糖片球菌)在发酵12小时后的pH值较低，分别为4.20、4.26和4.40。3株乳酸菌在发酵36h后的吸光值分别为3.01、2.91和2.80，均高于其它7株乳酸菌，生长速度也较快。A33、A74和A29适合做青贮饲料乳酸菌添加剂菌种。
6.根据弗氏Flieg评分法，三种饲用灌木不加添加剂青贮品质均较差，尖叶胡枝子SL0.0005%和SL0.001%+AC0.003%处理的青贮品质为好，其它处理品质为很好；达乌里胡枝子AC0.00075%和SL0.001%+AC0.003%处理得分为好，其它处理得分为很好；山竹岩黄芪SL0.001%、SL0.00025%、AC0.0015%和SL0.001%+AC0.003%处理得分为好，其它为很好。在与中北410玉米混贮中，尖叶胡枝子单贮的青贮品质为好，其它混贮处理得分为很好；达乌里胡枝子单贮的青贮品质为差，混贮评分为很好；山竹岩黄芪单贮青贮品质为好，混贮评分为很好，三种材料与中北410玉米混贮的适宜比例为70%中北410玉米。
7.综合三种评价方法，尖叶胡枝子、达乌里胡枝子和山竹岩黄芪与中北410玉米三种比例混贮的9个处理的乳酸含量最高，无丁酸生成，pH值最低，粗脂肪和可溶性糖含量也较高，青贮质量为优。三种材料单贮的6处理青贮质量为差。尖叶胡枝子、达乌里胡枝子和山竹岩黄芪青贮中添加SL和AC的27个处理对发酵品质均有不同程度改善，但不如混贮效果好。
In this experiment, Lespedeza hedysaroides (Pall.) Kitag., Lespedeza davurica (Laxm.) Schindl.and Hedysarum fruticosum Pall. were chosen to determine the characteristics of microbial flora dynamicchanges and fermentation quality, and main conclusions are as follows:
1. The number of adnascent microorganism on the three species of feeding shrubs in the squaringstage, initial bloom stage and full bloom stage has the following characteristics: The least number oflactic acid bacteria, aerobic bacteria, coliform bacteria, yeast and mold were found in the squaring stage;The largest number of coliform bacteria, yeast and mold were found in initial bloom stage, maximumwere107-108cfu/g, the number of lactic acid bacteria also increased, the number is about105cfu/g; infull bloom stage, counts of coliform bacteria, aerobic bacteria, yeast and mold decreased, moresignificance can be seen by coliform bacteria, counts of lactic acid bacteria increased a little inLespedeza davurica, decreased in Lespedeza hedysaroides and Hedysarum fruticosum. Counts ofadnascent lactic acid bacteria on three materials was far less than harmful microorganisms in initial andfull bloom stage.
2. The number of lactic acid bacteria, aerobic bacteria, yeast and mold gradually increased withincreasing content of corn, counts of coliform bacteria reduced with increasing content of corn in themixed ensiling of three materials and Zea mays L..
3. Lactic acid bacteria, aerobic bacteria, coliform bacteria, yeast and mold reached maximum wasmainly concentrated in2,5and10days, and then gradually reduced to a smooth; counts of coliformbacteria decreased significantly in ensiling30-60days in three materials ensiling with SL and ACaddition.
4. Sixty seven lactic acid bacteria strains were isolated from three materials, the initial and laterfermentation stage. These strains belonged to five genuses and fifteen species.
5. Three lactic acid bacteria strains A33(lactobacillus plantarum), A74(lactobacillus rhamnosus)and A29(pediococcus pentosaceus) were screened for their quicker acid-probuction rate and speed ofgrowth, their pH values were4.20、4.26and4.40after12hours fermentation, their absorbance valueswere3.01、2.91and2.80after36hours fermentation. Three lactic acid bacteria strains were suitable formicroorganism additive.
6. The Flieg evaluation method of silage showed that the fermentation quality was worst in directlyensiled Lespedeza hedysaroides, the treatments with SL0.001%+AC0.003%and SL0.0005%were good,others were excellent; the fermentation quality was worst in directly ensiled Lespedeza davurica, thetreatments with AC0.00075%and SL0.001%+AC0.003%were good, others were excellent and thefermentation quality was worst in directly ensiled Hedysarum fruticosum, the treatments withSL0.00025%, SL0.001%, AC0.0015%and SL0.001%+AC0.003%were good, others were excellent.The Flieg evaluation method of silage showed that the fermentation quality were good in directlyensiled Lespedeza hedysaroides and Hedysarum fruticosum, the fermentation quality was worse in directly ensiled Lespedeza davurica, others were excellent in three materials mixed ensiling with Zeamays L. The suitable mixed silage proportion of three materials and Zea mays L. was the70percent ofZea mays L..
7. Summarized three evaluations, three materials silaged with the three ratios Zea mays L. hadhigher lactic acid content and lower pH value, no butyric acid and the EE and WSC contents werehigher than others, silage quality is excellent. three materials directly ensiled had higher pH, butyricacid content and lower lactic acid content, silage quality is poor. The addition of SL and AC to threematerials improve the fermentation quality in varying degrees, but not as good as mixed silage.
引文
1.布瑞德.伯杰细菌鉴定手册[M].北京:科学出版社,1984:660-712
2.陈得明,余仁培,杨劲松.盐渍条件下小麦抗盐性的隶属函数值法评价[J].土壤学报,2002,39(3):368-374
3.蔡义民,熊井清雄.乳酸菌剂对青贮饲料发酵品质的改善效果[J].中国农业科学,1995,28(2):73-82
4.陈默君,贾慎修.中国饲用植物[M].北京:中国农业科学出版社,2002:245-248
5.崔艳伟,孟祥晨.乳杆菌的分离及鉴定[J].东北农业大学学报,2008,39(6):115-119
6.东秀珠,蔡妙英.常见细菌系统鉴定手册[M].北京:科学出版社,2001:289-313
7.都立辉,刘芳.16S rRNA基因在细菌菌种鉴定中的应用[J].乳业科学与技术,2006,5:207-208
8.杜晓华,艾日登才次克,李莉,等.蒙古地区酸乳中乳酸菌的鉴定及耐酸菌株筛选[J].微生物学通报,2009,36(7):994-1000
9.段宇珩,谈重芳,王雁萍.青贮饲料中微生物及乳酸菌特性初步研究[J].河南农业科学,2008,6:111-112
10.樊莉娟,孙启忠,张德罡,等.生物添加剂对灌木青贮中有机酸含量和pH值的影响[J].家畜生态学报,2008,29(4):68-70
11.范铁男,邹继宏,袁杰利.16S r RNA序列分析及其相关分子生物学方法在乳酸菌分类、鉴定中的应用[J].中国微生态学杂志,2010,22(2):179-180
12.付琳琳,曹郁生,李海星,等.应用PCE-DGGE技术分析泡菜中乳酸菌的多样性[J].食品与发酵工业,2005,31(12):103-105
13.官武太, Ashbell G., Hen Y.,等.微生物添加剂对青贮高粱发酵品质和稳定性的影响[J].中国农业科学,2002,35(11):1401-1405
14.郭望山,孟庆翔.杜马斯燃烧法与凯氏法测定饲料含氮量的比较研究[J].畜牧兽医学报,2006,37(5):464-468
15.韩吉雨,侯先志,杨凯,等.玉米青贮和苜蓿青贮菌群变化的比较研究[J].黑龙江畜牧兽医,2009,7:63-64
16.韩吉雨,王海荣,候先志,等. PCR-DGGE方法分析玉米及苜蓿青贮动态发酵体系中菌群多样性[J].安徽农业科学,2009,37(19):8888-8892
17.韩立英,玉柱.3种乳酸菌制剂对苜蓿和羊草的青贮效果[J].草业科学,2009,26(2):66-71
18.焦振泉,刘秀梅.16S rRNA序列同源性分析与细菌系统分类学鉴定[J].国外医学卫生学分册,1998,25:12-16
19.李凤梅,王晓,张双灵,等.自然发酵酸菜汁中乳酸菌分离鉴定[J].中国酿造,2008,5:33-35
20.李改英,陈玉霞,廉红霞,等.苜蓿青贮品质评定指标体系及测定方法的概述[J].草业科学,2010,27(08):151-154
21.李海滨,李一经,师守信.青贮饲料与微生物[J].饲料博览,1998,10(1):34-35
22.李梦寒,陈芝兰,南志强.乳酸菌青贮添加剂的研究进展[J].西藏科技,2008,11:65-67
23.李新蕊.主成分析、因子分析、聚类分析的比较与应用[J].山东教育学院学报,2007,6:24-25
24.李永富,乐国伟.微生物青贮接种剂的功效[J].饲料与畜牧,2003,2:10-11
25.李志勇,师文贵.内蒙古灌木、半灌木饲用植物资源[J].畜牧与饲料科学,2004,4:16-17
26.凌代文,东秀珠.乳酸细菌分类鉴定及实验方法[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社,1999:84-109
27.刘芳,都立辉,沙莎.利用16S rRNA基因同源性分析鉴定两株明串珠菌[J].中国微生态学杂志,2006,18(6):427-429
28.刘飞,杨丽杰,候俊财,等.青贮饲料中优质乳酸菌的分离鉴定[J].江西饲料,2007,1:22-25
29.刘建新,杨振海.青贮饲料的合理调制与质量评定标准[J].饲料工业,1999,20(3):4-7
30.刘琳,刘洋,刘红娟.基于16S rDNA的系统发育分析在微生物进化关系中的应用[J].生物学通报,2008,43(11):4-6
31.刘文彬.模糊综合评价系统研究与实现[硕士学位论文].廊坊:河北工业大学,2003
32.刘文华,任慧英,邹玲.等.一株优良乳酸茵的分离鉴定与特性研究[J].中国畜牧兽医,2008,35(2):152-153
33.区靖祥,邱健德.多元数据的统计分析方法[M].北京:中国农业技术出版社,2002:188-190
34.孙启忠,玉柱,樊丽娟,等.添加剂在四种灌木类饲用植物青贮中的应用[J].中国农业科技导报,2009,11(5):130-133
35.涂宏钢,李存瑞,巫庆华,等.利用16S rRNA全长序列鉴定植物乳杆菌[J].乳业科学与技术,2004,2:57-60
36.唐有祺.化学与社会[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1997:219-220
37.王炜宏,杜晓华,张家超,等.内蒙古鄂尔多斯地区酸粥发酵液中乳酸菌的分离鉴定[J].食品与生物技术学报,2010,29(2):265-270
38.王晓娜.蒙晋津京青贮饲料质量与安全性评价[硕士学位论文].北京:中国农业科学院,2011
39.王英,周剑忠,黄开红,等.泡菜中一株植物乳杆菌的分离筛选及鉴定[J].江苏农业学报,2010,26(1):219-221
40.王莹,玉柱.不同添加剂对紫花苜蓿发酵品质的影响[J].中国草地学报,2010,32(5):80-83
41.魏日华,桂荣,塔娜.牧草中异型发酵乳酸菌的分离与鉴定[J].草业科学,2010,27(10):149-153
42.吴高升.内蒙古灌木、半灌木饲草资源的开发利用[J].内蒙古畜牧科学,1986,2:20-22
43.熊素玉,姚新奎,谭小海,等.酸马奶中乳酸菌的分离、纯化与鉴定[J].新疆农业科学,2007,44(5):696-700
44.徐春波.胡枝子属牧草种质资源描述规范和数据标准[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2008
45.许庆方,韩建国,玉柱.达乌里胡枝子青贮的研究[J].牧草与饲料,2010,4(3):43-46
46.许庆方,韩建国,玉柱.青贮渗出液的研究进展[J].草业科学,2005,22(11):90-93
47.许庆方,玉柱,韩建国,等.高效液相色谱法测定紫花苜蓿青贮中的有机酸[J].草原与草坪,2007,2:63-67
48.许庆方,玉柱,李志强,等.苜蓿、玉米青贮饲料有氧稳定性研究[J].草地学报,2007,15(5):519-524
49.严萍,张永辉,麦热姆妮萨·艾麦尔,等.饲料玉米中优质乳酸菌的分离和鉴定[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(10):5926-5928
50.杨胜.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].北京:北京农业大学出版社,1993
51.于艳冬,孙启忠,玉柱,等.山竹岩黄芪青贮饲料初步研究[C].2008中国草业发展论坛文集.
52.余利岩,姚天爵.微生物生态学研究方法的新进展[J].生物学通报,2001,28(1):89-91
53.玉柱,陈燕,孙启忠,等.不同添加剂对白三叶青贮发酵品质与体外消化率的影响[J].中国农业科技导报,2009,11(4):133-138
54.玉柱,魏馨,于艳东,等. Silguard添加剂在尖叶胡枝子青贮饲料中的应用[J].饲料博览,2009,3:1-3
55.玉柱,魏馨,于艳冬,等.添加剂对尖叶胡枝子青贮发酵品质及体外消化率的影响[J].草业学报,2009,18(5):73-79
56.赵春兰.模糊因子综合评价法研究[硕士学位论文].成都:西南石油大学,2006
57.张大伟,陈林海,朱海霞.青贮饲料中主要微生物对青贮品质的影响[J].饲料研究,2007,3:65-66
58.张慧杰,玉柱,王林,等.青贮饲料中乳酸菌的分离鉴定及优良菌株筛选[J].草地学报,2011,19(1):137-141
59.张丽英.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].北京:中国农业大学出版社,2003
60.张涛,李蕾,崔宗均,等.添加不同青贮菌剂对苜蓿青贮效果的影响[J].青海草业,2009,18(3):2-5
61.张晓庆,樊丽娟.不同发酵型乳酸菌在饲料青贮中应用的研究进展[J].当代畜牧,2008,5:24-25
62.张新平,万里强,李向林,等.添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].草业学报,2007,16(3):139-143
63.张增欣,邵涛.青贮添加剂研究进展[J].草业科学,2006,23(9):56-61
64.张子仪.中国饲料学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000:334
65.郑新毅,吐尔洪,付彤.微生物青贮接种剂研究进展与探讨[J].草食家畜,2007,3:41-43
66.周德宝,蔡义民.纤维分解酶对青贮饲料发酵特性的影响[J].山东农业大学学报,1999,30(4):367-371
67. Aksu T, Baytok E, Bolat D. Effects of a bacterial silage inoculanton corn silage fermentation andnutrient digestibility [J].Small Ruminant Res,2004,55:249-252.
68. Barnett, A. J. G.. Silage fermentation [M]. London, England: Butterworth Scientific Publication,1954,111-113.
69. Bolsen K.K, C.lin, Brent B.E, et al. Effect of silage additives on the microbial succession andfermentation process of alfalfa and corn silages [J]. Dairy Science,1992,75:3066-3083.
70. Broderica G A, Kang J H. Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and amino acids inruminal fluid and in vitro media [J]. Journal Dairy Science,1980,33:64-75.
71. C. M. Jones, A. J. Heinrichs, G. W. Roth, et al. From Harvest to Feed: understanding silagemanagement [M]. The Pennsylvania State University,2004.
72. Cai Y, Ohmomo S, Ogawa M, et al. Effect of NaCl tolerant lactic acid bacteria and NaCl on thefermentation characteristics and aerobic stability of silage [J]. Journal of Applied Microbiology,1997,83:307-313.
73. Cai Y, Ohomom S, Kumai S. Distribution and lactate fermentation characteristics of lactic acidbacteria on forage crops and grasses [J]. Journal of Japanese Society of Grassland Science,1994,39(4):420-428.
74. Cai Y, S Kumai, M Ogawa, et al. Characterization and identification of pediococcus speciesisolated from forage crops and their application for silage preparation [J]. Applied andEnvironmental Microbiology,1999,65(7):2901-2906.
75. Cai Y, Suyanandana P, Saman P, et al. Classification and characterization of lactic acid bacteriaisolated from the intestines of common carp and fresh water prawns [J]. Journal of General andApplied Microbiology,1999,45:177-184.
76. Cai Y. Identification and characterization of Enterococcus species isolated from forage crops andtheir influence on silage fermentation [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1999,82(11):2466-2471.
77. Cai, Y., S. Kumai. The proportion of lactate isomers in farm silage and the influence of inoculationwith lactic acid bacteria on the proportion of L-lactate in silage [J]. Jpn. J. Zootech. Sci.1994,65:788-795.
78. Courtin M.G., Spoelstra S.F. A simulation model of the microbiological and chemical changesaccompanying the initial stage of aerobic deterioration of silage [J]. Grass and Forage Science,1990,45:153-165.
79. Cussen R.F., Merry R.J., Williams A.P., et al. The effect of additives on the ensilage of forage ofdiffering perennial ryegrass and white clover content [J]. Grass and Forage Science,1995,50(3):249-1258.
80. D. Combs, P. C. Hoffman. Lactobacillus buchneri for Silage Aerobic Stability [J]. Focus on Forage,2001,3(14):1-2.
81. D. R. Buxton, R. E. Muck, J. H. Herrison, at al. Silage Science and Technology [M]. AmericanSociety of Agronomy,2003.
82. Davies D.R., Merry R.J., Williams A.P., at al. Proteolysis during ensilage of forages varying insoluble sugar content [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1998,81:444-453.
83. Driehuis, F., S. J. W. H. Oude Elferink, S. F. Spolestra, Anaerobic lactic acid degradation duringensilage of whole crop maize inoculated with Lactobacillus buchneri inhibits yeast growth andimproves aerobic stability [J]. Applied Microbiology,1999,(87):583-594.
84. E.M.G. Nadeau, D.R. Buxton, J.R. Russell, et al. Enzyme, BacterialInoculant, and Formic AcidEffects on Silage Composition of Orchardgrass and Alfalfa [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2000,83(7):1487-1502.
85. F. Driehuis, S. J. W. H. Oude Elferink, P. G. Van Wikselaar. Fermentation characteristics andaerobic stability of grass silage inoculated with Lactobacillus buchneri, with or withouthomofermentative lactic acid bacteria [J]. Grass and Forage Science,2001,56:30-343.
86. Filya I. The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the fermentation,aerobic stability, and ruminal degradability of low dry matter corn and sorghum silages [J]. Journalof Dairy Science,2003,86(11):3575-3581.
87. H. Danner, M. Holzer, E. Mayrhuber. Acetic Acid Increases Stability of Silage under AerobicCondition [J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2003,69(1):562-567.
88. Han K J, Collins E, Vanzant S, et al. Bale density and moisture effects on alfalfa round bale silage[J]. Crop Science,2004,44(3):914-919.
89. Jian-Guo Zhang, Sumio Kumai, Ryohei Fukumi, et al. Effects of additives of lactic acid bacteriaand cellulases on the fermentation quality and chemical composition of naked barley straw silage[J]. Grassland Science,1997,43(2):88-94.
90. Jonas J, Vilma V. The effects of silage inoculants on the fermentation and aerobic stability oflegume-grass silage [J]. Agriculture,2001,98(4):367-372.
91. Korch G., Morvarid A., Kirchgessner M. The influence of micro-organisms of corn on the stabilityof silage [J]. Wirtschaftseigene futter,1973,19:15-21.
92. Kung L., N. K. Ranjit. The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and other additives on thefermentation and aerobic stability of barley silage [J]. Dairy Sci.2001,84:1149-1155.
93. Kung L., Tung R.S., Maciorowski K. Effect of a microbial inoculant and/or a glycopeptideantibiotic on fermentation and aerobic stability of wilted alfalfa silage [J]. Animal Feed Scienceand Technology,1991,35(2):37-48.
94. Lin C, Bolsen K K, Brent B E. Epiphytic lactic acid bacteria succession during the pre-ensiling andensiling periods of alfalfa and maize [J]. Appl Bcteriol,1992,73:375-385.
95. McDonald D, Henderson A R. Determination of watersoluble Carbohydrates in grass [J]. Journal ofthe Science of Food and Agriculture,1964,15:395-398.
96. Merry R.J., Dhanoa M.S., Theodorou M.K. Use of freshly cultured lactic acid bacteria as silageinoculants [J]. Grass and Forage Science,1995,50(2):112-123.
97. Moon N.J. Inhibition of the growth of acid tolerant yeasts by acetate, lactate and propionate andtheir synergistic mixtures [J]. Journal of Applied Bacteriology,1983,55:454-460.
98. Muck, R. E.. A lactic acid bacteria strain to improve aerobic stability of silages [J]. Dairy ForageRes.,1996,42-43.
99. Nishino N, Wada H, Yoshida M, et al. Microbial counts, fermentation products, and aerobicstability of whole crop corn and a total mixed ration ensiled with and without inoculation ofLactobacillus casei or lactobacillus buchneri [J]. Journa of Dairy Science,2004,87(8):2563-2570.
100. Oude Elferink, Stefanie J.W.H., Frank Driehuis, et al. Silage fermentation processes and theirmanipulation [J]. Agriculture and Consumer Protection,2000,161:17-30.
101. Peter McDonald, Nancy Henderson, Shirley Heron. The biochemistry of silage [M]. Chalcombe,1991.
102. Pitt, R. E., Y. L in, R. E. Muck. Stimulation of the effect of additives on aerobic stability of althlfaand corn silages [J]. Trans. ASAE1991,34:1633-1641.
103. Playne M J, McDonald P. The buffering constituents of herbage and silage [J]. Journal ScienceFood Agriculture,1966,17:264-268.
104. Ranjit, N. K., L. Kung. The effect of Lactobacillus plantarum and L. buchneri on the fermentationand aerobic stability of corn silage [J]. Dairy Sci.,2000,(83):526-535.
105. Sadahiro OHMOMO, Masaharu ODAI, Pimpaporn PHOLSEN, et al. Effect of a commercialinoculant on the fermentation quality of ABP silage in Thailand [J]. Japan Agricultural ResearchQuarterly,2004,38(2):125-128.
106. Tamaoka, J., k. Komagata. Determination of DNA base composition by reversed phase highperformance liquid chromatography [J]. FEMS Microbiol. Lett.,1984,124:11-16.
107. Taylor, C. C., J. M. Neylon, J. A. Lazartic, et al. Lactobacillus buchneri and enzymes improves theaerobic stability of high moisture corn [J]. Dairy Sci.,2000,83:111.
108. Tengerdy R P, Weinberg Z G, Szakacs G, et al. Ensiling alfalfa with additives of lactic acid bacteriaand enzymes [J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,1991,55:215-228.
109. Thomas Basuglo Bayorbor, Sumio Kumai, Ryohei Fukumi, et al. Effects of acremonium celluloseand lactic acid bacteria inoculant on the fermentation quality and digestibility of guineagrasssilages [J]. Japan Grassland Science,1993,39(3):317-325.
110. Thompson, J. D., D. G. Higgins, T. J. Gibson. CLUSTAL W: improveing the sensitivity ofprogressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting position apecific gappenalties and weight matrix choice [J]. Nucleic Acids Res.,1994,22:4673-4680.
111. Van Soest P J, Robertson J B, Lewis B A. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, andnonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition [J]. Journal Dairy Science,1991,74:3583-3597.
112. Weinberg Z G, Ashbell G, Hen Y, et al. The effect of applying lactic acid bacteria at ensiling on theaerobic stability of silages [J]. Appl. Bacteriol.,1993,75:512-518.
113. Weinberg Z.G., Muck R.E. New trends and opportunites in the development and use of inoculantsfor silage [M]. the Federation of European Microbiological Societies Microbiology Reviews,1996,19(1):53-68.
114. Weinberg, Z. G., G. Ashbell, Y. Hen. The effect of Lactobacillus bunchneri and L. plantarum, applied at ensiling, on the ensiling fermentation and aerobic stability of wheat and sorghum silages [J].lndustr. Micro-bioi.1999,23:218-222.
115. Woo P C, Chong K T, Leung K, et al. Identification of Arcobacter cryaerophilus isolated from atraffic accident victim with bacteremia by16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing [J]. DiagnMicrobiol Infect Dis,2001,40:125-127.
116. Woolford M K, Sawczyc M K. An investigation into the effect of culture of lactic acid bacteria onfermentation in silage [J]. Grass and Forage Science,1984,39:139-148.
117. Woolford M K. The detrimental effects of air on silage [J]. Journal of Applied Bacteriology,1990,68:101-112.
118. Y. CAI, Y. BENNO, M. OGAWA, et al. Effect of applying lactic acid bacteria isolated from foragecrops on fermentation characteristics and aerobic deterrioration of silage [J]. Journal of DairyScience,1999,82(3):520-526.
119. Yimin Cai. Phylogenetic diversity of lactic acid bacteria associated with paddy rice silage asdetermined by16S ribosomal DNA analysis [J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2003,69(1):444-451.
2.陈得明,余仁培,杨劲松.盐渍条件下小麦抗盐性的隶属函数值法评价[J].土壤学报,2002,39(3):368-374
3.蔡义民,熊井清雄.乳酸菌剂对青贮饲料发酵品质的改善效果[J].中国农业科学,1995,28(2):73-82
4.陈默君,贾慎修.中国饲用植物[M].北京:中国农业科学出版社,2002:245-248
5.崔艳伟,孟祥晨.乳杆菌的分离及鉴定[J].东北农业大学学报,2008,39(6):115-119
6.东秀珠,蔡妙英.常见细菌系统鉴定手册[M].北京:科学出版社,2001:289-313
7.都立辉,刘芳.16S rRNA基因在细菌菌种鉴定中的应用[J].乳业科学与技术,2006,5:207-208
8.杜晓华,艾日登才次克,李莉,等.蒙古地区酸乳中乳酸菌的鉴定及耐酸菌株筛选[J].微生物学通报,2009,36(7):994-1000
9.段宇珩,谈重芳,王雁萍.青贮饲料中微生物及乳酸菌特性初步研究[J].河南农业科学,2008,6:111-112
10.樊莉娟,孙启忠,张德罡,等.生物添加剂对灌木青贮中有机酸含量和pH值的影响[J].家畜生态学报,2008,29(4):68-70
11.范铁男,邹继宏,袁杰利.16S r RNA序列分析及其相关分子生物学方法在乳酸菌分类、鉴定中的应用[J].中国微生态学杂志,2010,22(2):179-180
12.付琳琳,曹郁生,李海星,等.应用PCE-DGGE技术分析泡菜中乳酸菌的多样性[J].食品与发酵工业,2005,31(12):103-105
13.官武太, Ashbell G., Hen Y.,等.微生物添加剂对青贮高粱发酵品质和稳定性的影响[J].中国农业科学,2002,35(11):1401-1405
14.郭望山,孟庆翔.杜马斯燃烧法与凯氏法测定饲料含氮量的比较研究[J].畜牧兽医学报,2006,37(5):464-468
15.韩吉雨,侯先志,杨凯,等.玉米青贮和苜蓿青贮菌群变化的比较研究[J].黑龙江畜牧兽医,2009,7:63-64
16.韩吉雨,王海荣,候先志,等. PCR-DGGE方法分析玉米及苜蓿青贮动态发酵体系中菌群多样性[J].安徽农业科学,2009,37(19):8888-8892
17.韩立英,玉柱.3种乳酸菌制剂对苜蓿和羊草的青贮效果[J].草业科学,2009,26(2):66-71
18.焦振泉,刘秀梅.16S rRNA序列同源性分析与细菌系统分类学鉴定[J].国外医学卫生学分册,1998,25:12-16
19.李凤梅,王晓,张双灵,等.自然发酵酸菜汁中乳酸菌分离鉴定[J].中国酿造,2008,5:33-35
20.李改英,陈玉霞,廉红霞,等.苜蓿青贮品质评定指标体系及测定方法的概述[J].草业科学,2010,27(08):151-154
21.李海滨,李一经,师守信.青贮饲料与微生物[J].饲料博览,1998,10(1):34-35
22.李梦寒,陈芝兰,南志强.乳酸菌青贮添加剂的研究进展[J].西藏科技,2008,11:65-67
23.李新蕊.主成分析、因子分析、聚类分析的比较与应用[J].山东教育学院学报,2007,6:24-25
24.李永富,乐国伟.微生物青贮接种剂的功效[J].饲料与畜牧,2003,2:10-11
25.李志勇,师文贵.内蒙古灌木、半灌木饲用植物资源[J].畜牧与饲料科学,2004,4:16-17
26.凌代文,东秀珠.乳酸细菌分类鉴定及实验方法[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社,1999:84-109
27.刘芳,都立辉,沙莎.利用16S rRNA基因同源性分析鉴定两株明串珠菌[J].中国微生态学杂志,2006,18(6):427-429
28.刘飞,杨丽杰,候俊财,等.青贮饲料中优质乳酸菌的分离鉴定[J].江西饲料,2007,1:22-25
29.刘建新,杨振海.青贮饲料的合理调制与质量评定标准[J].饲料工业,1999,20(3):4-7
30.刘琳,刘洋,刘红娟.基于16S rDNA的系统发育分析在微生物进化关系中的应用[J].生物学通报,2008,43(11):4-6
31.刘文彬.模糊综合评价系统研究与实现[硕士学位论文].廊坊:河北工业大学,2003
32.刘文华,任慧英,邹玲.等.一株优良乳酸茵的分离鉴定与特性研究[J].中国畜牧兽医,2008,35(2):152-153
33.区靖祥,邱健德.多元数据的统计分析方法[M].北京:中国农业技术出版社,2002:188-190
34.孙启忠,玉柱,樊丽娟,等.添加剂在四种灌木类饲用植物青贮中的应用[J].中国农业科技导报,2009,11(5):130-133
35.涂宏钢,李存瑞,巫庆华,等.利用16S rRNA全长序列鉴定植物乳杆菌[J].乳业科学与技术,2004,2:57-60
36.唐有祺.化学与社会[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1997:219-220
37.王炜宏,杜晓华,张家超,等.内蒙古鄂尔多斯地区酸粥发酵液中乳酸菌的分离鉴定[J].食品与生物技术学报,2010,29(2):265-270
38.王晓娜.蒙晋津京青贮饲料质量与安全性评价[硕士学位论文].北京:中国农业科学院,2011
39.王英,周剑忠,黄开红,等.泡菜中一株植物乳杆菌的分离筛选及鉴定[J].江苏农业学报,2010,26(1):219-221
40.王莹,玉柱.不同添加剂对紫花苜蓿发酵品质的影响[J].中国草地学报,2010,32(5):80-83
41.魏日华,桂荣,塔娜.牧草中异型发酵乳酸菌的分离与鉴定[J].草业科学,2010,27(10):149-153
42.吴高升.内蒙古灌木、半灌木饲草资源的开发利用[J].内蒙古畜牧科学,1986,2:20-22
43.熊素玉,姚新奎,谭小海,等.酸马奶中乳酸菌的分离、纯化与鉴定[J].新疆农业科学,2007,44(5):696-700
44.徐春波.胡枝子属牧草种质资源描述规范和数据标准[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2008
45.许庆方,韩建国,玉柱.达乌里胡枝子青贮的研究[J].牧草与饲料,2010,4(3):43-46
46.许庆方,韩建国,玉柱.青贮渗出液的研究进展[J].草业科学,2005,22(11):90-93
47.许庆方,玉柱,韩建国,等.高效液相色谱法测定紫花苜蓿青贮中的有机酸[J].草原与草坪,2007,2:63-67
48.许庆方,玉柱,李志强,等.苜蓿、玉米青贮饲料有氧稳定性研究[J].草地学报,2007,15(5):519-524
49.严萍,张永辉,麦热姆妮萨·艾麦尔,等.饲料玉米中优质乳酸菌的分离和鉴定[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(10):5926-5928
50.杨胜.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].北京:北京农业大学出版社,1993
51.于艳冬,孙启忠,玉柱,等.山竹岩黄芪青贮饲料初步研究[C].2008中国草业发展论坛文集.
52.余利岩,姚天爵.微生物生态学研究方法的新进展[J].生物学通报,2001,28(1):89-91
53.玉柱,陈燕,孙启忠,等.不同添加剂对白三叶青贮发酵品质与体外消化率的影响[J].中国农业科技导报,2009,11(4):133-138
54.玉柱,魏馨,于艳东,等. Silguard添加剂在尖叶胡枝子青贮饲料中的应用[J].饲料博览,2009,3:1-3
55.玉柱,魏馨,于艳冬,等.添加剂对尖叶胡枝子青贮发酵品质及体外消化率的影响[J].草业学报,2009,18(5):73-79
56.赵春兰.模糊因子综合评价法研究[硕士学位论文].成都:西南石油大学,2006
57.张大伟,陈林海,朱海霞.青贮饲料中主要微生物对青贮品质的影响[J].饲料研究,2007,3:65-66
58.张慧杰,玉柱,王林,等.青贮饲料中乳酸菌的分离鉴定及优良菌株筛选[J].草地学报,2011,19(1):137-141
59.张丽英.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].北京:中国农业大学出版社,2003
60.张涛,李蕾,崔宗均,等.添加不同青贮菌剂对苜蓿青贮效果的影响[J].青海草业,2009,18(3):2-5
61.张晓庆,樊丽娟.不同发酵型乳酸菌在饲料青贮中应用的研究进展[J].当代畜牧,2008,5:24-25
62.张新平,万里强,李向林,等.添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对苜蓿青贮品质的影响[J].草业学报,2007,16(3):139-143
63.张增欣,邵涛.青贮添加剂研究进展[J].草业科学,2006,23(9):56-61
64.张子仪.中国饲料学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000:334
65.郑新毅,吐尔洪,付彤.微生物青贮接种剂研究进展与探讨[J].草食家畜,2007,3:41-43
66.周德宝,蔡义民.纤维分解酶对青贮饲料发酵特性的影响[J].山东农业大学学报,1999,30(4):367-371
67. Aksu T, Baytok E, Bolat D. Effects of a bacterial silage inoculanton corn silage fermentation andnutrient digestibility [J].Small Ruminant Res,2004,55:249-252.
68. Barnett, A. J. G.. Silage fermentation [M]. London, England: Butterworth Scientific Publication,1954,111-113.
69. Bolsen K.K, C.lin, Brent B.E, et al. Effect of silage additives on the microbial succession andfermentation process of alfalfa and corn silages [J]. Dairy Science,1992,75:3066-3083.
70. Broderica G A, Kang J H. Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and amino acids inruminal fluid and in vitro media [J]. Journal Dairy Science,1980,33:64-75.
71. C. M. Jones, A. J. Heinrichs, G. W. Roth, et al. From Harvest to Feed: understanding silagemanagement [M]. The Pennsylvania State University,2004.
72. Cai Y, Ohmomo S, Ogawa M, et al. Effect of NaCl tolerant lactic acid bacteria and NaCl on thefermentation characteristics and aerobic stability of silage [J]. Journal of Applied Microbiology,1997,83:307-313.
73. Cai Y, Ohomom S, Kumai S. Distribution and lactate fermentation characteristics of lactic acidbacteria on forage crops and grasses [J]. Journal of Japanese Society of Grassland Science,1994,39(4):420-428.
74. Cai Y, S Kumai, M Ogawa, et al. Characterization and identification of pediococcus speciesisolated from forage crops and their application for silage preparation [J]. Applied andEnvironmental Microbiology,1999,65(7):2901-2906.
75. Cai Y, Suyanandana P, Saman P, et al. Classification and characterization of lactic acid bacteriaisolated from the intestines of common carp and fresh water prawns [J]. Journal of General andApplied Microbiology,1999,45:177-184.
76. Cai Y. Identification and characterization of Enterococcus species isolated from forage crops andtheir influence on silage fermentation [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1999,82(11):2466-2471.
77. Cai, Y., S. Kumai. The proportion of lactate isomers in farm silage and the influence of inoculationwith lactic acid bacteria on the proportion of L-lactate in silage [J]. Jpn. J. Zootech. Sci.1994,65:788-795.
78. Courtin M.G., Spoelstra S.F. A simulation model of the microbiological and chemical changesaccompanying the initial stage of aerobic deterioration of silage [J]. Grass and Forage Science,1990,45:153-165.
79. Cussen R.F., Merry R.J., Williams A.P., et al. The effect of additives on the ensilage of forage ofdiffering perennial ryegrass and white clover content [J]. Grass and Forage Science,1995,50(3):249-1258.
80. D. Combs, P. C. Hoffman. Lactobacillus buchneri for Silage Aerobic Stability [J]. Focus on Forage,2001,3(14):1-2.
81. D. R. Buxton, R. E. Muck, J. H. Herrison, at al. Silage Science and Technology [M]. AmericanSociety of Agronomy,2003.
82. Davies D.R., Merry R.J., Williams A.P., at al. Proteolysis during ensilage of forages varying insoluble sugar content [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,1998,81:444-453.
83. Driehuis, F., S. J. W. H. Oude Elferink, S. F. Spolestra, Anaerobic lactic acid degradation duringensilage of whole crop maize inoculated with Lactobacillus buchneri inhibits yeast growth andimproves aerobic stability [J]. Applied Microbiology,1999,(87):583-594.
84. E.M.G. Nadeau, D.R. Buxton, J.R. Russell, et al. Enzyme, BacterialInoculant, and Formic AcidEffects on Silage Composition of Orchardgrass and Alfalfa [J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2000,83(7):1487-1502.
85. F. Driehuis, S. J. W. H. Oude Elferink, P. G. Van Wikselaar. Fermentation characteristics andaerobic stability of grass silage inoculated with Lactobacillus buchneri, with or withouthomofermentative lactic acid bacteria [J]. Grass and Forage Science,2001,56:30-343.
86. Filya I. The effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus plantarum on the fermentation,aerobic stability, and ruminal degradability of low dry matter corn and sorghum silages [J]. Journalof Dairy Science,2003,86(11):3575-3581.
87. H. Danner, M. Holzer, E. Mayrhuber. Acetic Acid Increases Stability of Silage under AerobicCondition [J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2003,69(1):562-567.
88. Han K J, Collins E, Vanzant S, et al. Bale density and moisture effects on alfalfa round bale silage[J]. Crop Science,2004,44(3):914-919.
89. Jian-Guo Zhang, Sumio Kumai, Ryohei Fukumi, et al. Effects of additives of lactic acid bacteriaand cellulases on the fermentation quality and chemical composition of naked barley straw silage[J]. Grassland Science,1997,43(2):88-94.
90. Jonas J, Vilma V. The effects of silage inoculants on the fermentation and aerobic stability oflegume-grass silage [J]. Agriculture,2001,98(4):367-372.
91. Korch G., Morvarid A., Kirchgessner M. The influence of micro-organisms of corn on the stabilityof silage [J]. Wirtschaftseigene futter,1973,19:15-21.
92. Kung L., N. K. Ranjit. The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and other additives on thefermentation and aerobic stability of barley silage [J]. Dairy Sci.2001,84:1149-1155.
93. Kung L., Tung R.S., Maciorowski K. Effect of a microbial inoculant and/or a glycopeptideantibiotic on fermentation and aerobic stability of wilted alfalfa silage [J]. Animal Feed Scienceand Technology,1991,35(2):37-48.
94. Lin C, Bolsen K K, Brent B E. Epiphytic lactic acid bacteria succession during the pre-ensiling andensiling periods of alfalfa and maize [J]. Appl Bcteriol,1992,73:375-385.
95. McDonald D, Henderson A R. Determination of watersoluble Carbohydrates in grass [J]. Journal ofthe Science of Food and Agriculture,1964,15:395-398.
96. Merry R.J., Dhanoa M.S., Theodorou M.K. Use of freshly cultured lactic acid bacteria as silageinoculants [J]. Grass and Forage Science,1995,50(2):112-123.
97. Moon N.J. Inhibition of the growth of acid tolerant yeasts by acetate, lactate and propionate andtheir synergistic mixtures [J]. Journal of Applied Bacteriology,1983,55:454-460.
98. Muck, R. E.. A lactic acid bacteria strain to improve aerobic stability of silages [J]. Dairy ForageRes.,1996,42-43.
99. Nishino N, Wada H, Yoshida M, et al. Microbial counts, fermentation products, and aerobicstability of whole crop corn and a total mixed ration ensiled with and without inoculation ofLactobacillus casei or lactobacillus buchneri [J]. Journa of Dairy Science,2004,87(8):2563-2570.
100. Oude Elferink, Stefanie J.W.H., Frank Driehuis, et al. Silage fermentation processes and theirmanipulation [J]. Agriculture and Consumer Protection,2000,161:17-30.
101. Peter McDonald, Nancy Henderson, Shirley Heron. The biochemistry of silage [M]. Chalcombe,1991.
102. Pitt, R. E., Y. L in, R. E. Muck. Stimulation of the effect of additives on aerobic stability of althlfaand corn silages [J]. Trans. ASAE1991,34:1633-1641.
103. Playne M J, McDonald P. The buffering constituents of herbage and silage [J]. Journal ScienceFood Agriculture,1966,17:264-268.
104. Ranjit, N. K., L. Kung. The effect of Lactobacillus plantarum and L. buchneri on the fermentationand aerobic stability of corn silage [J]. Dairy Sci.,2000,(83):526-535.
105. Sadahiro OHMOMO, Masaharu ODAI, Pimpaporn PHOLSEN, et al. Effect of a commercialinoculant on the fermentation quality of ABP silage in Thailand [J]. Japan Agricultural ResearchQuarterly,2004,38(2):125-128.
106. Tamaoka, J., k. Komagata. Determination of DNA base composition by reversed phase highperformance liquid chromatography [J]. FEMS Microbiol. Lett.,1984,124:11-16.
107. Taylor, C. C., J. M. Neylon, J. A. Lazartic, et al. Lactobacillus buchneri and enzymes improves theaerobic stability of high moisture corn [J]. Dairy Sci.,2000,83:111.
108. Tengerdy R P, Weinberg Z G, Szakacs G, et al. Ensiling alfalfa with additives of lactic acid bacteriaand enzymes [J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,1991,55:215-228.
109. Thomas Basuglo Bayorbor, Sumio Kumai, Ryohei Fukumi, et al. Effects of acremonium celluloseand lactic acid bacteria inoculant on the fermentation quality and digestibility of guineagrasssilages [J]. Japan Grassland Science,1993,39(3):317-325.
110. Thompson, J. D., D. G. Higgins, T. J. Gibson. CLUSTAL W: improveing the sensitivity ofprogressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting position apecific gappenalties and weight matrix choice [J]. Nucleic Acids Res.,1994,22:4673-4680.
111. Van Soest P J, Robertson J B, Lewis B A. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, andnonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition [J]. Journal Dairy Science,1991,74:3583-3597.
112. Weinberg Z G, Ashbell G, Hen Y, et al. The effect of applying lactic acid bacteria at ensiling on theaerobic stability of silages [J]. Appl. Bacteriol.,1993,75:512-518.
113. Weinberg Z.G., Muck R.E. New trends and opportunites in the development and use of inoculantsfor silage [M]. the Federation of European Microbiological Societies Microbiology Reviews,1996,19(1):53-68.
114. Weinberg, Z. G., G. Ashbell, Y. Hen. The effect of Lactobacillus bunchneri and L. plantarum, applied at ensiling, on the ensiling fermentation and aerobic stability of wheat and sorghum silages [J].lndustr. Micro-bioi.1999,23:218-222.
115. Woo P C, Chong K T, Leung K, et al. Identification of Arcobacter cryaerophilus isolated from atraffic accident victim with bacteremia by16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing [J]. DiagnMicrobiol Infect Dis,2001,40:125-127.
116. Woolford M K, Sawczyc M K. An investigation into the effect of culture of lactic acid bacteria onfermentation in silage [J]. Grass and Forage Science,1984,39:139-148.
117. Woolford M K. The detrimental effects of air on silage [J]. Journal of Applied Bacteriology,1990,68:101-112.
118. Y. CAI, Y. BENNO, M. OGAWA, et al. Effect of applying lactic acid bacteria isolated from foragecrops on fermentation characteristics and aerobic deterrioration of silage [J]. Journal of DairyScience,1999,82(3):520-526.
119. Yimin Cai. Phylogenetic diversity of lactic acid bacteria associated with paddy rice silage asdetermined by16S ribosomal DNA analysis [J]. Applied and Environmental Microbiology,2003,69(1):444-451.