基于模糊相似优先比法评价规模化牧场全株玉米青贮饲料品质

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.01.025

新疆农业科学 ›› 2023, Vol. 60 ›› Issue (1): 215-225.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.01.025

• 植物保护 · 土壤肥料 · 草业 · 畜牧兽医 • 上一篇下一篇

基于模糊相似优先比法评价规模化牧场全株玉米青贮饲料品质

王挺¹(), 张凡凡¹, 黄华², 杨光维³, 陈卫国⁴, 张力⁵, 马春晖¹()

1.石河子大学动物科技学院,新疆石河子 832000
2.新疆生产建设兵团第七师农业农村局,新疆胡杨河 834034
3.伊犁哈萨克自治州畜牧科学研究所,新疆伊宁 835000
4.塔城地区畜牧科技研究推广中心,新疆塔城 834700
5.新疆农垦科学院作物研究所,新疆石河子 832000

收稿日期:2022-05-07 出版日期:2023-01-20 发布日期:2023-03-07
通信作者: 马春晖(1966-),男,新疆哈密人,教授,博士,博士生导师,研究方向为饲草生产与加工,(E-mail)chunhuima@126.com
作者简介:王挺(1995-),男,四川广元人,硕士研究生,研究方向为饲草生产与加工,(E-mail)1594494077@qq.com
基金资助:
财政部和农业农村部:国家现代农业产业技术体系项目(CARS);新疆生产建设兵团科技特派员创新创业计划项目(2019CB034)

Evaluation of the Whole-Plant Corn Silage Quality of Large-Scale Pastures Based on Fuzzy Similarity Priority Ratio Method

WANG Ting¹(), ZHANG Fanfan¹, HUANG Hua², YANG Guangwei³, CHENG Weiguo⁴, ZHANG Li⁵, MA Chunhui¹()

1. College of Animal Science and Technology, Shihezi University, Shihezi Xinjiang 832000, China
2. Agricultural and Rural Bureau of the Seventh Division of Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, Huyanghe Xinjiang 834034, China
3. Institute of Animal Husbandry Science of Yili Kazakh Autonomous Prefecture, Yining Xinjiang 835000, China
4. Animal Husbandry Technology Research and Extension Center of Tacheng Prefecture, Tacheng Xinjiang 834700, China
5. Crop Research Institute, Xinjiang Academy of Agri-Reclamation Sciences, Shihezi Xinjiang 832000, China

Received:2022-05-07 Online:2023-01-20 Published:2023-03-07
Correspondence author: MA Chunhui (1966-), male, Han nationality, born in Hami, Xinjiang, Doctor, professor, doctoral supervisor. Research direction: forage production and processing,(E-mail)chunhuima@126.com
Supported by:
China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA(CARS);Innovation; Entrepreneurship Program Project Of Science and Technology Commissioners of XPCC(2019CB034)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】研究新疆北疆地区规模化牧场全株玉米青贮饲料品质及生产水平,分析全株玉米青贮饲料品质,为推动新疆北疆地区青贮饲料高效生产提供依据。【方法】采集新疆北疆地区18个不同规模牧场中窖贮全株玉米青贮饲料,分析营养品质、发酵品质、霉菌毒素含量,运用模糊相似优先比法综合价值评定各规模化牧场全株玉米青贮饲料品质。【结果】各牧场青贮营养品质及发酵品质整体水平达到国家二级标准,所有牧场的霉菌毒素含量均符合国家限量标准。排名前三位的牧场为R>I>Q(存栏量在1 000头以上的牧场),排名后三位的牧场为N>L>H(存栏量在500头以下的牧场)。【结论】新疆北疆地区规模化牧场全株玉米青贮品质整体水平良好,但不同规模牧场之间存在差距,存栏量在1 000头以上的牧场整体水平优于存栏量在500头以下的牧场;各牧场全株玉米青贮品质主要受青贮玉米品种、地区气候特性、牧场规模的影响。

关键词: 规模化牧场; 全株玉米青贮饲料; 发酵品质; 霉菌毒素

Abstract:

【Objective】 The purpose of this study is to determine the quality and production level of whole-corn silage in large-scale pasture in northern Xinjiang and analyze the problems in the production of whole-plant corn silage in the hope of providing basis for promoting efficient production in the region. 【Method】 Whole-plant corn silage in 18 pastures of different scales were collected and nutritional quality, fermentation quality, and mycotoxin content analyzed by using the fuzzy similarity priority ratio method to comprehensively evaluate the whole-plant corn silage in each pasture. 【Result】 The overall level of nutrient quality and fermentation quality of each pasture silage reached the national second-level standard, the mycotoxin content of all pastures conformed to the national limit standard.The comprehensive evaluation showed that the top three pastures were: R > I > Q (pastures with a stock of more than 1,000 heads), the bottom three pastures were: N > L > H (pastures with a stock of less than 500 heads). 【Conclusion】 In summary, the overall quality of whole-plant corn silage in large-scale pastures in northern Xinjiang is excellent, but there is a gap between different scales of pastures.Pastures with inventory of more than 1,000 heads are better than pastures with inventory of less than 500 heads; the quality of whole-plant corn silage in each pasture was mainly affected by silage corn varieties, regional climate characteristics and pasture scale.

Key words: large-scale pasture; whole-plant corn silage; fermentation quality; mycotoxin

中图分类号:

S513

王挺, 张凡凡, 黄华, 杨光维, 陈卫国, 张力, 马春晖. 基于模糊相似优先比法评价规模化牧场全株玉米青贮饲料品质[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(1): 215-225.

WANG Ting, ZHANG Fanfan, HUANG Hua, YANG Guangwei, CHENG Weiguo, ZHANG Li, MA Chunhui. Evaluation of the Whole-Plant Corn Silage Quality of Large-Scale Pastures Based on Fuzzy Similarity Priority Ratio Method[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(1): 215-225.

图/表 5

参考文献 48

[1]	丁光省. 我国青贮玉米发展现状及发展方向[J]. 中国乳业, 2018,(4): 2-8.
	DING Guangsheng. The development status and development direction of silage corn in China[J]. China Dairy Industry, 2018,(4): 2-8.
[2]	丁光省. 从欧美青贮玉米产业发展看我国之差距[J]. 中国乳业, 2019,(4): 30-35.
	DING Guangsheng. Looking at the gap of my country from the development of silage corn industry in Europe and America[J]. China Dairy, 2019,(4): 30-35.
[3]	花梅. 不同地区青贮玉米发酵特性及微生物多样性[D]. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2013.
	HUA Mei. The fermentation characteristics and microbial diversity of the corn silage from different area[D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2013.
[4]	Bal M A, Shaver R D, Jobeile H A. et al. Corn Silage Hybrid Effects on Intake, Digestion, and Milk Production by Dairy Cows[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2001, 83(12): 2849-2858 DOI URL
[5]	姜富贵, 刘方圆, 宋恩亮. 不同收获期对全株玉米青贮营养价值、发酵品质和瘤胃降解率的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2019, 31(6): 2807-2815.
	JIANG Fugui, LIU Fangyuan, SONG Enliang. Effects of Different Harvest Stages on Nutritional Value, Fermentation Quality and Rumen Degradability of Whole Corn Silage[J]. Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2019, 31(6): 2807-2815.
[6]	Hara, Satoshi, Tamako. Effects of length of cut and mechanical processing on utilization of corn silage harvested at the black line stage of maturity by lactating dairy cows[J]. Animal Science Journal, 2010, 81(2): 187-193. DOI PMID
[7]	Savoie P, Muck R E. Laboratory assessment of bunker silo density-Part II: Whole-plant corn[J]. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 2004, 20(2): 165-171. DOI URL
[8]	Windle M C, Walker N, Kung Jr L. Effects of an exogenous protease on the fermentation and nutritive value of corn silage harvested at different dry matter contents and ensiled for various lengths of time[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2014, 97(5): 3053-3060. DOI PMID
[9]	Nair J. Effects of inoculation of corn silage with Lactobacillus hilgardii and Lactobacillus buchneri on silage quality, aerobic stability, nutrient digestibility, and growth performance of growing beef cattle[J]. Anim Sci, 2020: 420-421.
[10]	高卫红, 韩嵘. 新疆统计年鉴, 第十二篇农业[M]. 北京: 中国统计出版社, 2019:287-346.
	GAO Weihong, HAN Rong. Xinjiang Statistical Yearbook, Chapter 12 Agriculture[M]. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2019:287-346.
[11]	刘玉秀. 青贮玉米的质量评价与提高措施[J]. 中国牛业科学, 2017, 43(6): 81-83.
	LIU Yuxia. Quality Evaluation and Improvement Measures of Silage Corn[J]. China Cattle Science, 2017, 43(6): 81-83.
[12]	玉柱, 贾玉山, 张秀芬. 牧草加工贮藏与利用[M]. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2004: 12-32.
	YU Zhu, JIA Yushan, ZHANG Xiufen. Processing, Storage and Utilization of Pasture[M]. Beijing: Chemical Industry Press, 2004: 12-32.
[13]	郭勇庆, 曹志军, 李胜利. 全株玉米青贮生产与品质评定关键技术——高成本玉米时代牛场技术与管理策略之一[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2012, 48(18): 39-44.
	GUO Yongqing, CAO Zhijun, LI Shengli. The key technology of whole-plant corn silage production and quality assessment-one of the cattle farm technology and management strategies in the high-cost corn era[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2012, 48(18): 39-44.
[14]	GB/T 14699.1-2005.饲料采样[S].
	GB/T 14699.1-2005.Feed Sampling[S].
[15]	GB/T 14924.9.实验动物配合饲料常规营养成分的测定[S].
	GB/T 14924.9.Determination of Conventional Nutritional Components of Compound Feed for Laboratory Animals[S].
[16]	韩建国. 草地学 (第三版)[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2007.
	HAN Jianguo. Grassland Science(3rd Ed.)[M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Press, 2007.
[17]	高俊凤. 植物生理学实验指导[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2006
	GAO Junfeng. Plant Physiology Experimental Guide[M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2006.
[18]	GB5009.9.淀粉的测定-酶水解法,[S].
	GB5009.9.Determination of Starch-Enzymatic Hydrolysis Method,[S].
[19]	Broderick G A, Kang J H. Automated simultaneous determination of ammonia and total amino acids in ruminal fluid and in vitro media[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 1980, 63(1): 64-75. DOI PMID
[20]	许庆方, 周禾, 玉柱. 贮藏期和添加绿汁发酵液对袋装苜蓿青贮的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2006, 14(2): 129-133. DOI
	XU Qingfang, ZHOU He, YU Zhu. The Effect of Different Storage Time and Dilution Previous Fermented Juice on Bagged Alfalfa Silage[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2006, 14(2): 129-133.
[21]	GB 13078-2017.饲料卫生标准[S].
	GB 13078-2017.Feed Hygienic Standard for Feeds[S].
[22]	张凡凡, 于磊, 张前兵. 沙尔套山天然割草场主要豆科牧草营养价值综合评价研究[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2014, 51(10): 1907-1915.
	ZHANG Fanfan, YU Lei, ZHANG Qingbing. Comprehensive Assessment of the Main Legume Forages Nutritional Value of Natural Mowing Steppe in Shaertao Mountain, Zhaosu, Xinjiang[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2014, 51(10): 1907-1915.
[23]	GB/T 25882-2010.青贮玉米品质分级[S].
	GB/T 25882-2010.Grading of Silage Corn Quality[S].
[24]	中国畜牧业协会. 青贮饲料全株玉米[J]. 饲料与畜牧, 2019,(2): 37-41.
	China Animal Agriculture Association. Ensilage whole plant corn[J]. Feed and Animal Husbandry, 2019,(2): 37-41.
[25]	张凡凡. 纤维素分解菌与乳酸菌协同作用提高玉米青贮品质研究[D]. 石河子: 石河子大学, 2017.
	ZHANG Fanfan. Study on quality of corn silage by synergistic effect of cellulose decomposing and lactic acid bacteria colony[D]. Shihezi: Shihezi University, 2017.
[26]	席俊程, 赵连生, 殷术鑫. 基于模糊综合评价法评价黑龙江省全株玉米青贮饲料品质[J]. 动物营养学报, 2020, 32(4): 1875-1882. DOI
	XI Juncheng, ZHAO Liansheng, YIN Shuxing. Evaluation of Silage Quality of Whole Corn in Heilongjiang Province Based on Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method[J]. Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2020, 32(4): 1875-1882.
[27]	刘月, 王国艮, 吴浩. 全株青贮玉米品种对其发酵品质及营养价值的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(6): 148-156.
	LIU Yue, WANG Guogeng, WU Hao. Variety effects on fermentation quality and nutritive value of whole-plant maize silage[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(6): 148-156.
[28]	孙启忠, 玉柱, 马春晖, 等. 青贮饲料调制利用与气象[M]. 北京: 气象出版社, 2016: 6-8.
	SUN Qizhong, YU Zhu, MA Chunhui et al. Preparation and utilization of silage and meteorology[M]. Beijing: Meteorological Press, 2016: 6-8.
[29]	赵雪娇. 黑龙江地区规模化牧场全株玉米青贮品质评价及制作关键点分析[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北农业大学, 2019.
	ZHAO Xuejiao. Quality Evaluation and Key Points Analysis of Whole Plant Corn Silage in Large-scale Pasture of Heilongjiang Province[D]. Harbin:Northeast Agricultural University, 2019.
[30]	闫贵龙, 曹春梅, 刁其玉, 等. 夏季窖内不同深度全株玉米青贮品质和营养价值的比较[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2011, 42(3) :381-388.
	YAN Guilong, CAO Chunmei, DIAO Qiyu, et al. Comparisons of the Quality and Nutritional Value of Whole-plant Corn Silage at Various Depths under the Top Surface of Silo in Summer[J]. Acta Veterinaria et Zootechnica Sinica, 2011, 42(3):381-388.
[31]	Ferraretto L F, Shaver R D. Meta-analysis: effect of corn silage harvest practices on intake, digestion, and milk production by dairy cows[J]. Prof Anim Sci, 2012, 28(2): 141-149. DOI URL
[32]	王景山, 李昊, 韩润英, 等. 优质全株青贮玉米制作关键技术环节[J]. 中国畜禽种业, 2018, 14(2):31-32.
	WANG Jinshan, LI Hao, HAN Runying, et al. The key technical links of making high quality whole silage corn[J]. The Chinese Livestock Breeding, 2018, 14(2):31-32.
[33]	Dias Junior G S, Ferraretto L F, Salvati G G S, et al. Relationship between processing score and kernel-fraction particle size in whole-plant corn silage[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2016, 99(4): 2719-2729. DOI PMID
[34]	郭旭生, 丁武蓉, 玉柱. 青贮饲料发酵品质评定体系及其新进展[J]. 中国草地学报, 2008,(4): 100-106.
	GUO Xusheng, DING Wurong, YU Zhu. The Evaluation System of Fermentation Quality of Ensiled Forage and Its Improvement[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2008,(4): 100-106.
[35]	Shi Q P, Xu Z H, Zhang J G. Comparison of ten corn varieties as silage material in Guangzhou[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26(3): 175-182
[36]	Zhang Q, Li X, Zhao M. Lactic acid bacteria strains for enhancing the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of Leymus chinensis silage[J]. Grass and Forage Science, 2016, 71(3): 472-481. DOI URL
[37]	李菲菲, 张凡凡, 马春晖. 同/异型发酵乳酸菌对全株玉米青贮营养成分和瘤胃降解特征的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(6): 128-136.
	LI Feifei, ZHANG Fanfan, MA Chunhui. Effects of homo-and heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria on the nutritional quality and ruminal degradation rate of the whole plant maize silage[J]. Acta Prata Sinica, 2019, 28(6): 128-136.
[38]	Borreani G, Piano S, Tabacco E. Aerobic stability of maize silage stored under plastic films with different oxygen permeability[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2014, 94(13): 2684-2690. DOI PMID
[39]	翁玉楠, 罗军, 王平. 乳酸菌制剂对饲用油菜与全株玉米或玉米秸秆混合青贮品质的影响[J/OL]. 动物营养学报: 1-8[2021-05-18].
	WEN Yunan, LUO Jun, WANG Ping. Effects of Lactic Acid Bacteria Preparation on Quality of Mixed Silage of Forage Rape with Whole Crop Corn or Corn Stalk[J/OL]. Journal of Animal Nutrition: 1-8[2021-05-18].
[40]	赵超, 姜鑫, 张永根. 添加乳酸菌和纤维素酶对豆渣与桑叶混贮品质及体外瘤胃发酵特性的影响[J/OL]. 动物营养学报: 1-10[2021-05-15].
	ZHAO Chao, JIANG Xing, ZHANG Yonggen. Effects of Adding Lactic Acid Bacteria and Cellulase on Quality of Mixed Silage of Soybean Residue and Mulberry Leaves and Rumen Fermentation Characteristics in Vitro[J/OL]. Journal of Animal Nutrition: 1-10[2021-05-15].
[41]	Muck R. Recent advances in silage microbiology[J]. Agricultural and Food Science, 2013, 22(1): 3-15. DOI URL
[42]	Zachariasova M, Dzuman Z, Veprikova Z, et al. Occurrence of multiple mycotoxins in European feeding stuffs assessment of dietary intake by farm animals[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2014, 193: 124-140. DOI URL
[43]	Antonio G, Gianluca G, Jens F, et al. Review on mycotoxin issues in ruminants: Occurrence in forages, effects of mycotoxin ingestion on health status and animal performance and practical strategies to counteract their negative effects[J]. Toxins, 2015, 7(8): 3057-3111. DOI PMID
[44]	Alonso V A, Pereyra C M, Keller L A M, et al. Fungi and mycotoxins in silage: an overview[J]. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 2013, 115(3): 637-643. DOI PMID
[45]	Ogunade I M, Martinez-Tuppia C, Queiroz O C M, et al. Silage review:Mycotoxins in silage: Occurrence, effects, prevention, and mitigation[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2018, 101(5): 4034 -4059. DOI PMID
[46]	Li Y, Wang Z, Beier R C, et al. T-2 Toxin, a trichothecene mycotoxin: Review of toxicity, metabolism, and analytical methods[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2011, 59(8): 3441-3453. DOI PMID
[47]	Cheeke P R, Shull L R. Natural toxicants in feeds and poisonous plants[J]. Veterinary and Human Toxicology, 1990, 32(5): 243-274.
[48]	Marczuk J, Obremski K, Lutnicki K, et al. Zearalenone and deoxynivalenol mycotoxicosis in dairy cattle herds[J]. Polish Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 2012, 15(2): 365-372. PMID

牧场 Pasture	地区 Area	坐标 Coordinates (N, E)	存栏量 Inventory (thousands) (10³头)	贮藏量 Storage capacity (ten thou sands tons) (10⁴ t)	压制时间(年) Suppression time (years)	主要品种 Main varieties
A	塔城地区	44°61'65″N,85°36'54″E	0.7	1.1	2019	新玉76号,现代39
B	塔城地区	46°71'32″N,83°59'55″E	3.6	3.5	2020	和育187,先玉335
C	塔城地区	47°01'75″N,82°97'90″E	0.7	0.65	2019	和育187,新玉76号
D	塔城地区	47°43'78″N,84°87'52″E	0.6	1.3	2019	恩喜爱298,先玉1321
E	伊犁地区	43°86'03″N,81°45'22″E	0.4	0.35	2019	中北412,新饲玉3号
F	伊犁地区	43°76'68″N,81°18'65″E	1.5	1.5	2019	奥玉5102,桂青贮1号
G	伊犁地区	43°57'30″N,82°55'75″E	4.5	6	2020	中北412,恩喜爱298
H	伊犁地区	43°49'75″N,82°42'35″E	0.4	0.4	2019	恩喜爱298,中北412
I	伊犁地区	43°76'91″N,81°19'05″E	10	10	2020	恩喜爱298,先玉335
J	奎屯地区	44°78'31″N,84°56'38″E	1.16	1.2	2020	先玉335,恩喜爱298
K	奎屯地区	44°38'16″N,84°11'46″E	0.28	0.3	2019	先玉1321,先玉335
L	奎屯地区	44°39'23″N,84°12'17″E	0.35	0.3	2020	恩喜爱298,先玉335
M	奎屯地区	44°88'17″N,84°72'77″E	1.1	1.4	2020	先玉335,恩喜爱298
N	奎屯地区	44°38'25″N,84°11'76″E	0.45	0.8	2019	恩喜爱298,先玉335
O	奎屯地区	44°86'87″N,84°86'07″E	1.2	0.9	2020	恩喜爱298,先玉335
P	博州地区	45°04'01″N,81°62'73″E	0.7	1.1	2019	新引KWS2564,先玉335
Q	博州地区	45°03'11″N,81°79'09″E	10	8	2020	新玉16号,先玉335
R	克拉玛依地区	45°49'61″N,85°03'38″E	1.8	2.3	2020	先玉335,先玉1321

牧场 Pasture	地区 Area	坐标 Coordinates (N, E)	存栏量 Inventory (thousands) (10³头)	贮藏量 Storage capacity (ten thou sands tons) (10⁴ t)	压制时间(年) Suppression time (years)	主要品种 Main varieties
A	塔城地区	44°61'65″N,85°36'54″E	0.7	1.1	2019	新玉76号,现代39
B	塔城地区	46°71'32″N,83°59'55″E	3.6	3.5	2020	和育187,先玉335
C	塔城地区	47°01'75″N,82°97'90″E	0.7	0.65	2019	和育187,新玉76号
D	塔城地区	47°43'78″N,84°87'52″E	0.6	1.3	2019	恩喜爱298,先玉1321
E	伊犁地区	43°86'03″N,81°45'22″E	0.4	0.35	2019	中北412,新饲玉3号
F	伊犁地区	43°76'68″N,81°18'65″E	1.5	1.5	2019	奥玉5102,桂青贮1号
G	伊犁地区	43°57'30″N,82°55'75″E	4.5	6	2020	中北412,恩喜爱298
H	伊犁地区	43°49'75″N,82°42'35″E	0.4	0.4	2019	恩喜爱298,中北412
I	伊犁地区	43°76'91″N,81°19'05″E	10	10	2020	恩喜爱298,先玉335
J	奎屯地区	44°78'31″N,84°56'38″E	1.16	1.2	2020	先玉335,恩喜爱298
K	奎屯地区	44°38'16″N,84°11'46″E	0.28	0.3	2019	先玉1321,先玉335
L	奎屯地区	44°39'23″N,84°12'17″E	0.35	0.3	2020	恩喜爱298,先玉335
M	奎屯地区	44°88'17″N,84°72'77″E	1.1	1.4	2020	先玉335,恩喜爱298
N	奎屯地区	44°38'25″N,84°11'76″E	0.45	0.8	2019	恩喜爱298,先玉335
O	奎屯地区	44°86'87″N,84°86'07″E	1.2	0.9	2020	恩喜爱298,先玉335
P	博州地区	45°04'01″N,81°62'73″E	0.7	1.1	2019	新引KWS2564,先玉335
Q	博州地区	45°03'11″N,81°79'09″E	10	8	2020	新玉16号,先玉335
R	克拉玛依地区	45°49'61″N,85°03'38″E	1.8	2.3	2020	先玉335,先玉1321

指标 Index	数值 Value	权重 Weight
干物质 DM(%)	38.00	0.2
淀粉 Starch(%)	35.00	0.2
粗蛋白 CP(%)	10.00	0.1
中性洗涤纤维 NDF(%)	30.00	0.15
酸性洗涤纤维 ADF(%)	20.00	0.15
水溶性碳水化合物 WSC(%)	22.00	0.1
pH	3.50	0.05
乳酸 LA(%)	6.50	0.01
乙酸 AA(%)	1.20	0.01
丙酸 PA(%)	1.60	0.01
丁酸 BA(%)	1.40	0.01
氨态氮/总氮 NH₃·N/TN	6.00	0.01

指标 Index	数值 Value	权重 Weight
干物质 DM(%)	38.00	0.2
淀粉 Starch(%)	35.00	0.2
粗蛋白 CP(%)	10.00	0.1
中性洗涤纤维 NDF(%)	30.00	0.15
酸性洗涤纤维 ADF(%)	20.00	0.15
水溶性碳水化合物 WSC(%)	22.00	0.1
pH	3.50	0.05
乳酸 LA(%)	6.50	0.01
乙酸 AA(%)	1.20	0.01
丙酸 PA(%)	1.60	0.01
丁酸 BA(%)	1.40	0.01
氨态氮/总氮 NH₃·N/TN	6.00	0.01

基于模糊相似优先比法评价规模化牧场全株玉米青贮饲料品质

Evaluation of the Whole-Plant Corn Silage Quality of Large-Scale Pastures Based on Fuzzy Similarity Priority Ratio Method

在线阅读

PDF下载

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 5

参考文献 48

相关文章 7

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	杨寒珺, 黄星宇, 王旭哲, 张凤华, 鲁为华, 张凡凡. 田间晾晒时间对饲用油菜发酵品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(6): 1433-1441.
[2]	黄星宇, 孙海荣, 杨寒珺, 张凡凡, $\boxed{\hbox{鲁为华}}$. 添加甜叶菊渣对绢蒿青贮发酵品质及苦味掩盖(去除)的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(3): 742-749.
[3]	徐鹏飞, 王旭哲, 杨寒珺, 黄星宇, 付东青, $\boxed{\hbox{鲁为华}}$, 孙新文. 添加糖蜜对棉秆微贮品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(3): 715-726.
[4]	宋磊, 王彦超, 张凡凡, 王旭哲, 张建, 马春晖. 不同收获期燕麦青贮品质分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2021, 58(10): 1938-1946.
[5]	早热古丽·热合曼, 叶尔兰·对山别克, 万江春, 艾比布拉·伊马木. 添加香梨残次果汁渣对苜蓿青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2019, 56(6): 1136-1141.
[6]	黄玲;蒋刚强;王帅;刘小兰. 新疆番茄生长及其果实加工过程中霉菌污染的监测[J]. , 2011, 48(8): 1458-1464.
[7]	于山江·玉素浦;艾尼瓦尔·艾山;赵光伟. 不同处理方法对不同生育期新疆小芦苇发酵品质及营养成分的影响[J]. , 2008, 45(6): 1090-1094.