项目 Item | 成分 Composition | 含量 Content |
原料构成 Ingredients/% | ||
水稻秸秆 Rice straw | 20.00 | |
玉米秸秆Corn straw | 20.00 | |
精料 Concentrate | 35.00 | |
全株四棱豆 Whole winged bean | 25.00 | |
化学成分 Chemical composition | 干物质Dry matter/(g·kg–1) | 562.10 |
粗蛋白Crude protein/(g·kg–1) | 140.55 | |
粗脂肪 Ether extract/(g·kg–1) | 22.28 | |
粗灰分 Crude ash/(g·kg–1) | 83.60 | |
水溶性碳水化合物 WSC/(g·kg–1) | 58.45 | |
中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber/(g·kg–1) | 464.86 | |
酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber/(g·kg–1) | 248.67 | |
微生物成分 Microbial populations | ||
乳酸菌Lactic acid bacteria/ (lg cfu·g–1) | 4.43 | |
酵母菌 Yeast/(lg cfu·g–1) | 5.90 | |
好氧性微生物 Aerobic bacteria/(lg cfu·g–1) | 4.43 | |
精料 = 30%玉米粉,4%豆粕,12%菜粕,8%棉粕,15%DDGS,20%麦麸,9%预混料,2%食盐;原料构成、粗蛋白、粗脂肪、水溶性碳水化合物、粗灰分、中性洗涤纤维、酸性洗涤纤维都是以干物质为基础测定。下同。 WSC: water soluble carbohydrates; TMR: total mixed ration; Concentrate = 30% cracked corn, 4% rapeseed meal, 8% cottonseed meal, 15% corn dry distiller grain, 20% wheat bran, 2% salt (dry matter); Ingredients, crude protein, crude fat, water soluble carbohydrates, crude ash, neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber are all determined on the basis of dry matter; similarly for the following tables and figures. |

Citation: QIU X Y, YAO Y Z, PAN R Z, LI Y S, WU X J, XIANG S J, SHAO T, TIAN Y Q. Effects of sodium diacetate and molasses on the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of total mixed ration silages containing straw. Pratacultural Science, 2019, 36(10): 2703-2711. doi:

双乙酸钠和糖蜜对秸秆TMR青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响
English
Effects of sodium diacetate and molasses on the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of total mixed ration silages containing straw
-
Key words:
- total mixed ration /
- sodium diacetate /
- molasses /
- fermentation quality /
- aerobic stability
-
-
-
[1]
郭冬生, 黄春红. 近10年来中国农作物秸秆资源量的时空分布与利用模式[J]. 西南农业学报西南农业学报, 2016, 29(4): 948-954.
GUO D S, HUANG C H. Spatial and temporal distribution of crop straw resources in past 10 years in China and its use pattern[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural ScienceSouthwest China Journal of Agricultural Science, 2016, 29(4): 948-954. -
[2]
丁良, 原现军, 闻爱友, 王坚, 郭刚, 李君风, 王思然, 白晰, 邵涛. 添加剂对西藏啤酒糟全混合日粮青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草业学报草业学报, 2016, 25(7): 112-120.
DING L, YUAN X J, WEN A Y, WANG J, GUO G, LI J F, WANG S R, BAI X, SHAO T. Effects of additives on fermentation quality and aerobic stability of total mixed ration silage containing wet brewers’ grains in Tibet[J]. Acta Prataculturae SinicaActa Prataculturae SinicaBG视讯, 2016, 25(7): 112-120. -
[3]
QIU X Y, YUAN X J, GUO G, SHAO T. Effects of adding acetic acid and molasses on fermentation quality and aerobic stability of total mixed ration silage prepared with hulless barley straw in Tibet[J]. Japanese Society of Grassland ScienceJapanese Society of Grassland Science, 2014, 60(): 206-213. doi:
-
[4]
原现军, 王奇, 李志华, 余成群, 下条雅敬, 邵涛. 添加糖蜜对青稞秸秆和多年生黑麦草混合青贮发酵品质及营养价值的影响[J]. 草业学报草业学报, 2013, 22(3): 116-123.
YUAN X J, WANG Q, LI Z H, YU C C, MASATAKA S, SHAO T. Effect of molasses addition on fermentation and nutritive quality mixed silage of hulless barley straw and perennial ryegrass in Tibet[J]. Acta Prataculturae SinicaActa Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(3): 116-123. -
[5]
陈鑫珠, 高承芳, 张晓佩, 李文杨, 翁伯琦. 糖蜜对不同比例苎麻杂交狼尾草混合青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 草地学报草地学报, 2016, 24(6): 1358-1362.
CHEN X Z, GAO C F, ZHANG X P, LI W Y, WENG B Q. Effects of molasses on the fermentation quality of mixed silage of ramie and hybrid pennisetum[J]. Acta Agrestia SinivaActa Agrestia Siniva, 2016, 24(6): 1358-1362. -
[6]
李志春, 游向荣, 张雅媛, 李杰民, 付桂明, 孙健, 王振兴, 李明娟. 糖蜜和米糠对香蕉茎叶青贮饲料品质的影响[J]. 南方农业学报南方农业学报, 2016, 44(12): 2058-2061.
LI Z C, YOU X R, ZHANG Y Y, LI J M, FU G M, SUN J, WANG Z X, LI M J. Effects of molasses and rice bran on quality of banana stem and leaf silage[J]. Journal of Southern AgricultureJournal of Southern Agriculture, 2016, 44(12): 2058-2061. -
[7]
HOSSEIN M, YOUSEF S, ALI M, DARIUSH S, PARVIN D, JAFAR E N D. Safety assessment of sodium acetate, sodium diacetate and potassium sorbate food additives[J]. Food ChemistryFood ChemistryBG视讯, 2018, 257(15): 211-215.
-
[8]
刘振阳, 孙娟娟, 姜义宝, 玉柱, 王成章. 双乙酸钠对苜蓿与小麦混合青贮发酵品质和有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 中国草地学报中国草地学报, 2017, 39(2): 83-89.
LIU Z Y, SUN J J, JIANG YI B, YU Z, WANG C Z. Effect of sodium diacetate on fermentation quality and aerobic stability of mixed alfalfa and wheat silage[J]. Chinese Journal of GrasslandChinese Journal of Grassland, 2017, 39(2): 83-89. -
[9]
张新慧, 张永根, 赫英飞. 添加两种乙酸钠盐对玉米青贮品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学中国农业科学, 2008, 41(6): 1810-1815.
ZHANG X H, ZHANG Y G, HE Y F. Effect of adding two types of sodium acetate compounds on corn silage quality and aerobic stability[J]. Scientia Agriculture SinicaScientia Agriculture SinicaBG视讯, 2008, 41(6): 1810-1815. -
[10]
YUAN X J, GANG G, WEN A Y, DESTA S T, WANG J, WANG YONG UNDERSANDER D J, SHAO T. The effect of different additives on the fermentation quality, in vitro digestibility and aerobic stability of a total mixed ration silage[J]. Animal Feed Science and TechnologyAnimal Feed Science and Technology, 2015, 207(): 41-50. doi:
-
[11]
DESTA S T, YUAN X J, LI J, SHAO T. Ensiling characteristics, structural and nonstructural carbohydrate composition and enzymatic digestibility of Napier grass ensiled with additives[J]. Bioresource TechnologyBioresource Technology, 2016, 221(): 447-454. doi:
-
[12]
VAN SOEST P J, ROBERTSON J B, LEWIS B A. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition[J]. Journal of Dairy ScienceJournal of Dairy Science, 1991, 74(): 3583-3597. doi:
-
[13]
NKOSI B D, MEESKE R. Effects of ensiling totally mixed potato hash ration with or without a heterofermentative bacterial inoculant on silage fermentation, aerobic stability, growth performance and digestibility in lambs[J]. Animal Feed Science and TechnologyAnimal Feed Science and TechnologyBG视讯, 2010, 61(): 38-48.
-
[14]
李国栋, 申成利, 陈明霞, 陈鑫珠, 张建国, 梁克勤. 添加物对水稻青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草业科学草业科学, 2012, 29(4): 658-662.
LI G D, SHEN C L, CHEN M X, CHEN X Z, ZHANG J G, LIANG K Q. Effects of additives on the fermentation quality and aerobic stability of rice silage[J]. Pratacultural SciencePratacultural ScienceBG视讯, 2012, 29(4): 658-662. -
[15]
原现军, 余成群, 李志华, 下条雅敬, 邵涛. 西藏青稞秸秆与多年生黑麦草混合青贮发酵品质的研究[J]. 草业学报草业学报, 2012, 21(4): 516-522.
YUAN X J, YU C Q, LI Z H, MASATAKA S, SHAO T. A study on fermentation quality of mixed silages of hulless barley straw and perennial ryegrass in Tibet[J]. Acta Prataculturae SinicaActa Prataculturae SinicaBG视讯, 2012, 21(4): 516-522. -
[16]
YUAN X J, WANG J, GUO G, WEN A Y, DESTA S T, SHAO T. Effects of ethanol, molasses and Lactobacillus plantarum on fermentation characteristics and aerobic stability of total mixed ration silages[J]. Grass and Forage ScienceGrass and Forage Science, 2016, 71(2): 328-338. doi:
-
[17]
LI Y, WANG F, NISHINO N. Lactic acid bacteria in total mixed ration silage containing soybean curd residue: Their isolation, identification and ability to inhibit aerobic deterioration[J]. Asian Australasian Journal of Animal SciencesAsian Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2016, 29(4): 516-522. doi:
-
[18]
赵庆杰, 原现军, 郭刚, 闻爱友, 巴桑, 王奇, 沈振西, 余成群, 邵涛. 添加糖蜜和乳酸菌制剂对西藏青稞秸秆和多年生黑麦草混合青贮发酵品质的影响[J]. 草业学报草业学报, 2014, 23(4): 100-106.
ZHAO Q J, YUAN X J, GUO G, WEN A Y, BA S, WANG Q, SHEN Z X, YU C Q, SHAO T. Effect of adding an inoculant and molasses on fermentation quality of mixed silage of hull-lessbarley straw and perennial ryegrass in Tibet[J]. Acta Prataculturae SinicaActa Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(4): 100-106. -
[19]
邱小燕, 原现军, 郭刚, 闻爱友, 余成群, 巴桑, 邵涛. 添加糖蜜和乙酸对西藏发酵全混合日粮青贮发酵品质及有氧稳定性影响[J]. 草业学报草业学报, 2014, 23(6): 111-118.
QIU X Y, YUAN X J, GUO G, WEN A Y, YU C C, BA S, SHAO T. Effects of molasses and acetic acid on termentation and aerobic stability of total mixed ration silage in Tibet[J]. Acta Prataculturae SinicaActa Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(6): 111-118. -
[20]
国卫杰, 王加启, 王晶, 卜登攀, 张俊瑜, 宋增廷. 添加不同水平双乙酸钠对包裹TMR贮存效果的影响[J]. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版)西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2009, 37(12): 45-50.
GUO W J, WANG J Q, WANG J, BU D P, ZHANG J Y, SONG Z T. Effect of the different levels of sodium diacetate supplementation on the storage of the baled TMR[J]. Journal of Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University (Natural Science Edition)Journal of Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University (Natural Science Edition)BG视讯, 2009, 37(12): 45-50. -
[21]
WEN A Y, YUAN X J, WANG J, DESTA S T, SHAO T. Effects of four short-chain fatty acids or salts on dynamics of fermentation and microbial characteristics of alfalfa silage[J]. Animal Feed Science and TechnologyAnimal Feed Science and Technology, 2017, 223(): 141-148. doi:
-
[22]
NISHINO N, HATTORI H. Resistance to aerobic deterioration of total mixed ration silage inoculated with and without homofermentative or heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and AgricultureJournal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2010, 87(): 2420-2426.
-
[23]
DRIHUIS F, OUDE ELFERINKl S J W H, VAN WIKSELAAR P G. Fermentation characteristics and aerobic stability of grass silage inoculated with Lactobacillus buchneri, with or without homofermentative lactic acid bacteria[J]. Grass and Forage ScienceGrass and Forage Science, 2001, 56(4): 330-343. doi:
-
[24]
PLEGGE S D, GOODRICH R D, HANSON S A. SDA improving aerobic stability of corn or half-dried silage[J]. FeedstuffsFeedstuffsBG视讯, 1992, 64(58): 19-26.
-
[25]
CHEN L, GUO G, YU C Q, ZHANG J, SHIMOJO M, SHAO T. The effects of replacement of whole-plant corn with oat ad common vetch on the fermentation quality, chemical composition and aerobic stability of total mixed ration silage in Tibet[J]. Animal ScienceAnimal Science, 2015, 86(): 60-76.
-
[26]
JOHNSON L M, HARRISON J H, DAVIDSON D, MAHANNA W C, SHINNERS K, LINDER D. Corn silage management: effect of maturity, inoculation, and mechanical processing on pack density and aerobic stability[J]. Journal of Dairy ScienceJournal of Dairy Science, 2002, 85(2): 434-444. doi:
-
[27]
CHEN L, GUO G, YUAN X J, SHIMOJO M, YU C Q, SHAO T. Effect of applying molasses and Propionic acid on fermentation quality and aerobic stability of total mixed ration silage prepared with whole-plant corn in tibet[J]. Asian Australasian Journal of Animal SciencesAsian Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 2014, 27(3): 349-358. doi:
-
[1]
-
BG视讯
图 1 青贮35 d后各添加剂对发酵全混合日粮有氧稳定性的影响
Figure 1. BG视讯 Effect of each additive on the aerobic stability of TMR silages after 35 d of ensiling
表 1 发酵全混合日粮的原料构成及化学、微生物成分
Table 1. BG视讯 Ingredients and chemical and microbial composition of total mixed ration silages
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 发酵全混合日粮配方中全株四棱豆、玉米秸秆、水稻秸秆、精料的化学成分
Table 2. Chemical composition of whole bead, corn stalk, rice straw, and concentrate used in total mixed ration silages
化学成分
Chemical composition全株四棱豆
Whole winged bean玉米秸秆
Corn straw水稻秸秆
Rice straw精料
Concentrate干物质 Dry matter/(g·kg–1) 149.80 755.70 831.87 546.80 水溶性碳水化合物 WSC/(g·kg–1) 91.82 30.16 10.40 53.32 粗蛋白 Crude protein/(g·kg–1) 127.73 40.33 49.22 179.05 粗脂肪 Ether extract/(g·kg–1) 35.80 14.91 21.24 33.30 中性洗涤纤维 Neutral detergent fiber/(g·kg–1) 390.78 684.36 758.21 412.45 酸性洗涤纤维 Acid detergent fiber/(g·kg–1) 224.63 386.28 328.07 176.93 下载: 导出CSV
表 3 BG视讯 不同处理发酵全混合日粮的发酵品质
Table 3. Fermentation quality of total mixed ration silages of different treatments
项目 Item C S M SM pH 4.37 ± 0.06ab 4.49 ± 0.05a 4.23 ± 0.10b 4.26 ± 0.01b 缓冲能 Buffering capacity/(mE·kg–1) 712.06 ± 4.63c 794.76 ± 5.47ab 725.76 ± 6.32bc 809.67 ± 7.10a 乳酸 Lactic acid/(g·kg–1) 22.05 ± 3.06b 25.61 ± 4.40b 38.86 ± 6.23a 35.78 ± 5.41a 水溶性碳水化合物 WSC/(g·kg–1) 50.60 ± 1.46a 34.05 ± 4.63b 42.59 ± 2.95ab 36.94 ± 4.18b 氨态氮/总氮 Ammonia nitrogen/total nitrogen 3.35 ± 0.21a 2.78 ± 0.03ab 2.39 ± 0.08bc 1.75 ± 0.04c 乙酸 Acetic acid/(g·kg–1) 1.66 ± 0.06b 2.04 ± 0.10b 2.50 ± 0.09b 4.64 ± 0.02a 丙酸 Propionic acid/(g·kg–1) 1.06 ± 0.01a 1.35 ± 0.08a 1.27 ± 0.04a 1.54 ± 0.07a 丁酸 Acetic acid/(g·kg–1) 0.58 ± 0.07a 0.59 ± 0.06a 0.62 ± 0.02a 0.59 ± 0.01a 乳酸菌 Lactic acid bacteria/(lg cfu·g–1) 4.42 ± 0.21a 4.27 ± 0.15a 4.47 ± 0.17a 4.12 ± 0.16a 酵母菌 Yeast/(lg cfu·g–1) 5.01 ± 0.04a 5.12 ± 0.06a 4.98 ± 0.14a 5.01 ± 0.12a 好氧性微生物 Aerobic bacteria/(lg cfu·g–1) 4.42 ± 0.23a 4.27 ± 0.21a 4.47 ± 0.12a 4.12 ± 0.22a 同行不同小写字母表示不同处理间差异显著(P < 0.05);C: 无添加对照组;S: 双乙酸钠添加组;M: 糖蜜添加组;SM: 双乙酸钠和糖蜜组合添加组;下同。
Different lowercase letters within the same row indicate significant differences between different treatments at the 0.05 level. C: Control; S: sodium diacetate group; M: molasses group; SM: sodium diacetate and molasses group; similarly for the following tables and figures.下载: 导出CSV
表 4 有氧暴露阶段发酵全混合日粮的pH、乳酸和碳水化合物含量的变化
Table 4. Changes in pH, lactic acid, and water-soluble carbohydrates content of total mixed ration silages during exposure to air
指标
Index处理
Treatment有氧暴露天数 Days of exposure to air/d 0 3 6 9 12 15 pH C 4.37 ± 0.04bA 4.48 ± 0.23bA 4.49 ± 0.12bA 5.73 ± 0.32abA 5.95 ± 0.14abA 6.30 ± 0.16aA S 4.49 ± 0.24aA 4.40 ± 0.15aA 4.40 ± 0.08aA 4.38 ± 0.13aB 4.50 ± 0.11aB 4.44 ± 0.05aB M 4.23 ± 0.08bB 4.19 ± 0.03bB 4.17 ± 0.16bB 4.83 ± 0.15abA 5.08 ± 0.17aA 5.18 ± 0.24aA SM 4.26 ± 0.23aB 4.24 ± 0.14aB 4.21 ± 0.23aB 4.17 ± 0.08aB 4.31 ± 0.26aB 4.26 ± 0.07aB 乳酸
Lactic acid/
(g·kg–1)C 22.05 ± 3.06aB 21.84 ± 2.04aB 20.32 ± 5.04aB 11.23 ± 3.18bA 10.62 ± 4.24bB 8.80 ± 2.07bB S 25.61 ± 4.40aB 23.94 ± 3.06aB 20.57 ± 2.16aB 18.35 ± 3.18aA 19.68 ± 4.07aA 20.39 ± 5.09aA M 38.86 ± 6.23aA 31.11 ± 4.08abA 30.31 ± 2.32abA 26.44 ± 4.46bA 24.88 ± 3.19bA 20.89 ± 2.91bA SM 35.78 ± 5.41aA 36.24 ± 5.30aA 30.78 ± 2.04abA 31.34 ± 4.19abA 22.20 ± 3.08bA 22.11 ± 5.17bA 水溶性碳水
化合物 WSC/
(g·kg–1)C 50.52 ± 1.46aA 30.30 ± 2.09abB 35.24 ± 5.09abAB 21.44 ± 5.11bB 17.38 ± 4.16bB 9.41 ± 2.34cB S 34.05 ± 4.63aB 32.86 ± 6.19aAB 29.10 ± 5.26aB 27.28 ± 5.06aAB 22.36 ± 2.31abB 17.64 ± 3.54abA M 42.59 ± 2.98abAB 40.16 ± 6.03aA 40.49 ± 5.27aA 37.35 ± 6.30abA 31.12 ± 3.89abA 16.10 ± 2.08bA SM 36.94 ± 4.18ab 34.77 ± 5.06abAB 36.21 ± 3.78abAB 39.56 ± 6.37aA 31.81 ± 5.01abA 17.27 ± 2.88bA 同一指标同列不同大写字母表示相同有氧暴露天数不同处理间差异显著 (P < 0.05);同行不同小写字母表示相同处理不同有氧暴露天数间差异显著 (P < 0.05);下同。
Different capital letters within the same column of same index indicate significant differences between different treatments in the same exposed days at the 0.05 level,and different lowercase letters within the same row indicate significant differences at the 0.05 level; similarly for the following tables.下载: 导出CSV
表 5 有氧暴露阶段发酵全混合日粮的乙酸、丙酸和丁酸含量的变化
Table 5. Changes in acetic acid, propionic acid, and butyric acid content of total mixed ration silages during exposure to air
指标 Index 处理
Treatment有氧暴露天数 Days of exposure to air/d 0 3 6 9 12 15 乙酸
Acetic acid/(g·kg–1)C 1.66 ± 0.05bB 2.40 ± 0.56aA 2.43 ± 0.03aA 2.04 ± 0.08abB 1.16 ± 0.26bB 1.40 ± 0.16bB S 3.03 ± 0.09bA 2.51 ± 0.09bA 1.91 ± 0.14bA 6.03 ± 2.16aA 4.28 ± 1.16abA 2.12 ± 1.11bA M 2.46 ± 1.06bAB 2.29 ± 1.33bA 2.34 ± 1.03bA 3.67 ± 1.48aB 1.39 ± 0.06cB 1.49 ± 0.07cB SM 4.04 ± 0.08aA 2.12 ± 0.06bA 1.79 ± 0.04cA 3.43 ± 0.07abB 2.35 ± 0.10bA 4.25 ± 0.12aA 丙酸
Propionic acid/(g·kg–1)C 1.06 ± 0.02abA 1.21 ± 0.04aA 1.04 ± 0.15abA 0.95 ± 0.05abcA 0.67 ± 0.02cA 0.78 ± 0.22bcA S 1.35 ± 0.06aA 1.17 ± 0.01abA 1.03 ± 0.10abA 1.03 ± 0.04abA 0.52 ± 0.01cA 0.88 ± 0.04bA M 1.27 ± 0.07aA 1.29 ± 0.02aA 0.99 ± 0.01abA 0.84 ± 0.06abA 0.88 ± 0.06abA 0.79 ± 0.11bA SM 1.54 ± 0.14abA 1.36 ± 0.03abA 0.87 ± 0.08bA 1.03 ± 0.13bA 0.84 ± 0.07bA 0.24 ± 0.16aA 丁酸
Acetic acid/(g·kg–1)C 0.58 ± 0.12aA 0.57 ± 0.15aA 0.53 ± 0.02aA 0.46 ± 0.01aA 0.55 ± 0.02aA 0.59 ± 0.04aA S 0.59 ± 0.11aAB 0.57 ± 0.11aA 0.54 ± 0.04abA 0.46 ± 0.05bcA 0.58 ± 0.04aA 0.40 ± 0.01bA M 0.62 ± 0.13 aA 0.61 ± 0.04aA 0.50 ± 0.08bA 0.46 ± 0.10bcA 0.54 ± 0.03abA 0.44 ± 0.07cA SM 0.59 ± 0.04bAB 0.57 ± 0.03bA 0.49 ± 0.09bA 0.44 ± 0.01bA 0.51 ± 0.07bA 1.01 ± 0.02aA 下载: 导出CSV
表 6 BG视讯 有氧暴露阶段发酵全混合日粮微生物数量变化
Table 6. Number changes in microorganism of total mixed ration silages during exposure to air
指标 Index 处理 Treatment 有氧暴露天数 Days of exposure to air/d 0 3 6 9 12 15 好氧性微生物
Aerobic bacteria/
(lg cfu·g–1)C 5.27 ± 0.16bA 5.84 ± 0.19abA 6.02 ± 0.14abA 6.13 ± 0.45abA 5.93 ± 0.21abA 6.51 ± 0.44aA S 5.07 ± 0.07bA 5.72 ± 0.24abA 5.98 ± 0.23abA 6.02 ± 0.22abA 5.49 ± 0.33bA 6.45 ± 0.47aA M 4.90 ± 0.18bA 5.88 ± 0.31abA 6.01 ± 0.27abA 6.01 ± 0.34aA 5.76 ± 0.42abA 6.63 ± 0.34aA SM 4.88 ± 0.10bA 5.47 ± 0.22abA 6.03 ± 0.16abA 6.03 ± 0.18abA 6.09 ± 0.06abA 6.62 ± 0.29aA 酵母菌
Yeast/(lg cfu·g–1)C 5.20 ± 0.11bA 5.51 ± 0.18bA 5.74 ± 0.09abA 5.59 ± 0.24abA 6.28 ± 0.18aA 5.69 ± 0.34abA S 5.10 ± 0.18aA 5.48 ± 0.16abA 5.54 ± 0.42aA 5.52 ± 0.33aA 5.68 ± 0.56aA 5.57 ± 0.61aA M 5.58 ± 0.09bA 5.83 ± 0.10abA 6.13 ± 0.55aA 5.85 ± 0.26aA 5.46 ± 0.47abA 5.59 ± 0.22aA SM 5.15 ± 0.07aA 5.20 ± 0.06aA 5.69 ± 0.37aA 5.06 ± 0.37aA 5.27 ± 0.38aA 5.60 ± 0.34aA 乳酸菌
Lactic acid bacteria/
(lg cfu·g–1)C 6.89 ± 0.12aA 6.77 ± 0.08aA 6.02 ± 0.23abA 5.92 ± 0.41abAB 5.61 ± 0.44abA 4.78 ± 0.28bA S 6.49 ± 0.17abA 6.91 ± 0.15aA 6.23 ± 0.33bcA 6.31 ± 0.40bcA 5.85 ± 0.50cA 4.76 ± 0.42dA M 6.07 ± 0.21aA 6.20 ± 0.16aB 6.19 ± 0.37aA 6.07 ± 0.37aAB 5.58 ± 0.46aA 4.42 ± 0.37bA SM 6.54 ± 0.22abA 7.00 ± 0.14aA 6.00 ± 0.44bA 5.75 ± 0.28bcB 5.10 ± 0.53cdA 4.48 ± 0.42eA 下载: 导出CSV
-