'Shrink' losses in commercially sized corn silage piles: Quantifying total losses and where they occur.
'Shrink' losses in commercially sized corn silage piles: Quantifying total losses and where they occur.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.10.090
复制
发表时间：
2016-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
P. H. Robinson;N. Swanepoel;J. Heguy;T. Price;D. Meyer
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. H. Robinson;N. Swanepoel;J. Heguy;T. Price;D. Meyer
青贮饲料“收缩”（即，在青贮和喂出之间新鲜切碎的作物的损失）代表营养物的损失，其可作为挥发性碳化合物降低空气质量，由于渗漏降低地表水道，或由于渗漏降低含水层。事实上，没有任何研究记录了大型青贮饲料堆的收缩。术语“收缩”通常定义不清，但可表示为湿重损失（WW）、烘箱干燥物质损失（oDM）和校正干燥箱中挥发物损失的oDM（vcoDM）。玉米青贮料堆在加州圣华金河谷的混凝土（4）、土壤（2）和混合物（1）上，使用细菌接种剂，在24小时内覆盖氧气屏障内膜和黑色/白色外塑料，使用大型前端装载机通过电子进料跟踪系统进料，以及2013年的作物产量。WW、oDM和vcoDM的收缩率分别为90 ± 17、68 ± 18和28 ± 21 g/kg，这表明在分析烘箱干燥期间，大部分WW收缩是水，大部分oDM收缩是挥发物损失。大多数收缩发生在青贮料质量与暴露的青贮料面之间的损失，以及暴露面青贮料去除和总混合口粮混合机，是低的。青贮饲料的体积密度，暴露的青贮饲料面管理和面使用率没有明显的影响，任何收缩措施，但年龄的青贮饲料堆在青贮饲料喂养影响收缩损失（“老”青贮饲料堆较高），但最强烈的WW收缩。真实的收缩损失（即，大型管理良好的玉米青贮料堆的收缩率（vcoDM）较低，暴露的青贮料面是损失的一小部分，许多建议的收缩缓解措施似乎无效，可能是因为收缩率总体较低，并且它们主要针对暴露的青贮料面。
Silage ‘shrink’ (i.e., loss of fresh chopped crop between ensiling and feedout) represents a nutrient loss which can degrade air quality as volatile carbon compounds, degrade surface waterways due to seepage, or degrade aquifers due to seepage. Virtually no research has documented shrink in large silage piles. The term ‘shrink’ is often ill defined, but can be expressed as losses of wet weight (WW), oven dry matter (oDM), and oDM corrected for volatiles lost in the drying oven (vcoDM). Corn silage piles (4 wedge, 2 rollover/wedge, 1 bunker) from 950 to 12,204 tonnes as built, on concrete (4), soil (2) and a combination (1) in California's San Joaquin Valley, using a bacterial inoculant, covered within 24 h with an oxygen barrier inner film and black/white outer plastic, fed out using large front end loaders through an electronic feed tracking system, and from the 2013 crop year, were used. Shrink as WW, oDM and vcoDM were 90 ± 17, 68 ± 18 and 28 ± 21 g/kg, suggesting that much WW shrink is water and much oDM shrink is volatiles lost during analytical oven drying. Most shrink occurred in the silage mass with losses from exposed silage faces, as well as between exposed face silage removal and the total mixed ration mixer, being low. Silage bulk density, exposed silage face management and face use rate did not have obvious impacts on any shrink measure, but age of the silage pile during silage feedout impacted shrink losses (‘older’ silage piles being higher), but most strongly for WW shrink. Real shrink losses (i.e., vcoDM) of large well managed corn silage piles are low, the exposed silage face is a small portion of losses, and many proposed shrink mitigations appeared ineffective, possibly because shrink was low overall and they are largely directed at the exposed silage face.