Four forage sorghum silage additives evaluated

Two trials were conducted to evaluated four forage sorghum silage additives: ammonium iso-butyrate, aureomycin, sodium hydroxide, and a mixture of acetic and propionic acids. A control silage received no additives

Dilatancy transition in a granular model

We introduce a model of granular matter and use a stress ensemble to analyze shearing. Monte Carlo simulation shows the model to exhibit a second order phase transition, associated with the onset of dilatancy.Comment: Future versions can be obtained from: http://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/radin/papers/shear2.pd

Silage additive update: 1985

Silage additives are receiving fairly widespread acceptance in the U.S. as management tools that are important for silage-making. Many products, which are added to the crop at the time of harvest or ensiling, are available commercially in Kansas. Some manufacturers/distributors make no claims for their products, primarily because management is such an important factor in making a good quality silage. Others claim their product will improve silage quality. When a claim is made, it is wise to check for evidence that the product has a favorable effect on the silage crop in question. Farm-scale silo trials at Kansas State University have shown that a few silage additives repeatedly reduced "in silo" losses. But results will probably not be favorable with all additives under every farm condition. Therefore, results obtained with a commercial product in our trials may not apply to other products on the market, however similar in ingredient formulation

Four forage sorghum silage additives evaluated

Two trials were conducted to evaluated four forage sorghum silage additives: ammonium iso-butyrate, aureomycin, sodium hydroxide, and a mixture of acetic and propionic acids. A control silage received no additives

Additive-treated corn and forage sorghum silages for growing cattle

Whole-plant corn silages were treated with Ecosyl® or Foraform® in one trial and Biomate® or Biomate + Cold-flo® in the second trial. In both trials, the silages were well preserved, but all were highly unstable in air during the first 3 to 4 weeks of the feed-out period. Foraform-treated silage was 2 to 6 degrees F cooler than its control, but Cold-flo-treated silage was 2 to 8 degrees F warmer during the first 10 days post-filling. Laboratory silo results showed that both control silages fermented extremely fast; however, inoculated silages had slightly lower pH and higher lactic acid values through the first 4 to 7 days postfilling. Foraform lowered the initial pH of the ensiled material, restricted subsequent fermentation, and produced a silage with about one-half the acid content compared to its control. Cold-flo raised the initial pH and delayed the start of fermentation, but resulted in a silage with greater acid content and an increased dry matter loss. Though not significant, calves fed Ecosyl, Foraform, and Biomate silages had about 6 percent better feed conversion than those fed control silages and gain per ton of crop ensiled was also higher for the three treated silages. Cold-flo-treated silage produced 3.5 lb less gain per ton of crop ensiled than its control. Whole-plant forage sorghums were treated with TriLac® in one trial and Silagest® in the second trial. Inoculated silages had slightly lower ensiling temperatures than controls. All silages fermented rapidly, but both inoculants increased ensiling efficiency as indicated by higher lactic to acetic acid ratios (in laboratory silos) and decreased dry matter losses (in farm-scale silos). Calves fed Silagest silage outperformed those fed control silages, and both inoculants increased gain per ton of crop ensiled over control silages

Evaluation of interseeded grain sorghum and soybeans as a silage crop

Interseeded grain sorghum and soybeans have been evaluated as a silage crop over a 3year period. In the first 2 years, maximum dry matter (DM) yields occurred at the late-dough stage of the grain sorghum, and interseeded silages had higher crude protein (CP) and acid detergent fiber contents than non-interseeded late-dough stage, grain sorghum control silages. In year 2, seeding grain sorghum and soybeans in alternating IS-inch rows increased DM yield, CP content, and the proportion of soybean plants in the mixture compared to drilled (6-inch spacing) interseeding. Digestibilities of most nutrients were similar in all silages; however, cattle fed control silage consumed the most DM in year 1, but not in year 2. In both years, calves fed the control silages had faster gains than those fed drilled sorghum-soybean silages. Adding grain improved gain and intake only for calves fed the interseeded silage in year 1. In year 3, seeding grain sorghum and Williams 82 soybeans in alternating rows did not increase DM yield over the drilled interseeding. However, the drilled mixture had a much higher proportion of soybean plants compared to the first two years. All mixtures had higher CP content than control grain sorghum

Local e extensão da digestão em terneiros desmamados alimentados "Ad Libitum" com dietas ricas em concentrado contendo diferentes fontes de proteína suplementar Site and extent of digestion by weaned calves fed "Ad Libitum" on high concentrate-rich diets with different supplemental protein sources

Foram utilizados nove terneiros da raça Holandesa (139 &plusmn; 2,4kg), fistulados no duodeno, em um delineamento experimental completamente casualizado para estudar o efeito da suplementação com diferentes fontes protéicas (2% de uréia ou 10% de farinha de carne na dieta total) de dietas ricas em concentrado (milho e farelo de soja) sobre o local e extensão da digestão do alimento, em condições de consumo ad libitum. A relação volumoso:concentrado das dietas foi de 30:70. A digestibilidade ruminal e total da matéria seca, matéria orgânica e nitrogênio, assim como o fluxo duodenal de nitrogênio microbiano e residual do alimento, e a eficiência da síntese protéica microbiana foram semelhantes nos dois tratamentos (P>0,10). A digestibilidade ruminal do amido também foi semelhante, mas a digestibilidade total foi menor no tratamento com uréia (P<0,10). No entanto, é provável que isso seja devido mais a limitações dos ruminantes em digerir amido no intestino delgado do que a uma influência do suplemento protéico. O uso de uréia ou de farinha de carne, como fontes de proteína suplementar de dietas à base de milho e farelo de soja, balanceadas para suprir a demanda de crescimento de terneiros jovens e fornecidas ad libitum, não influencia significativamente o processo de digestão nestes animais. Deste modo, a escolha por um outro suplemento depende mais de outros critérios do que dos nutricionais.<br>Nine weaned Holstein calves (139 &plusmn; 2.4kg) fitted with duodenal cannulas were used in a completly ramdomized design to study the effects of supplemental protein sources (2% of urea or 10% of meat meal) of high concentrate diets (corn and soybean meal) on site and extent of digestion of feed, in ad libitum feeding conditions. The forage:concentrate ratio was 30:70. The ruminal and total digestibility of dry matter, organic matter and nitrogen, as well as microbial and feed residual nitrogen duodenal flow, and the microbial protein synthesis efficiency were similar for both treatments (P>0.10). The ruminal digestibility of starch was also similar, but total digestibility was lower for urea treatment (P<0.10). However, this is probably due more to the limited capacity of ruminants to digest starch in the intestines than to an effect of the protein supplement. The use of urea or meat meal, as supplemental protein sources for corn and soybean meal based diets, formulated to supply the growth requirements of calves fed ad libitum, did not affect the digestion process.Thus, the choise of the protein supplement do not depend on nutritionals reasons