strategies to enhance the nutritive value of whole-plant
TRANSCRIPT
Strategies to enhance the nutritive value of whole-plant and
fractionated corn silage
Luiz F. Ferraretto, Ph.D., PAS
Department of Animal Sciences
University of Florida
Introduce indicators of corn silage nutritive value
Highlight the use and application of these indices
Define and discuss the fractions of corn plant based feedstuffs
Discuss practical strategies to enhance these quality indices
Objective
Intake limitation through rumen fill
Impact milk yield and the establishment of high-forage diets
Corn Silage Quality Indicators
Indicator
NDF (% DM)
Lignin (% DM)
uNDF240 (% DM)
NDFD30 (% NDF)
TTNDFD (% NDF)
Practical Implication
Methods vary across laboratories and may include calculation of pools and rates of digestion.
• +0.18 kg/d DMI
• +0.25 kg/d 4%FCM (Oba and Allen, 1999)
For every 1 percentage-unit increase in NDF
digestibility
• +0.12 kg/d DMI
• +0.14 kg/d 3.5%FCM (Jung et al., 2010)
>40% corn silage in diet
Forage NDF digestibility and cow performance
Fiber digestibility and chewing behavior
Study Intake Eating time
Grant et al., 1994 88.3 120.7
Aydin et al., 1999 Exp. 1 85.0 117.9
Aydin et al., 1999 Exp. 2 95.6 105.6
Oliver et al., 2004 95.5 114.9
Grant and Ferraretto, 2018; JDS
Data presented as percentage of control treatment
Alter energy density
Impact milk yield or feed efficiency
Corn Silage Quality Indicators
Indicator
Starch (% DM)
StarchD (% starch)
Prolamin (% DM)
Practical Implication
Methods vary across laboratories and may include calculation of rates of digestion.
Corn Silage Quality Indicators
Indicator
Milk per ton
Used as an index for ranking corn hybrids – commonly used by University Hybrid Performance Trials
3200
3400
3600
3800
7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0lb
of
milk p
er
ton
of
silag
e D
M
Yield of DM, Tons per acre
Whole-plant corn silage
High-cut corn silage
Toplage / Stalklage
Earlage / Snaplage
HMC / Rehydrated corn / DGC
Feedstuffs commonly obtained from a corn plant
Whole-plant material
Whole-plant CS High-cut CS Toplage
Stalklage
20 cm
40 to 60 cm
115 cm
Cutting height, cm 25 100 115 130
DM, % 37.7c 40.6b 42.2b 53.3a
CP, % of DM 8.2b 8.9a 8.9a 8.8a
NDF, % of DM 40.3a 34.5b 32.1b 19.5c
Lignin, % of DM 4.0a 3.4bc 3.1c 2.2d
Starch, % of DM 33.9d 38.8c 43.0b 58.6a
Ash, % of DM 3.7a 3.4ab 3.1b 1.7c
Yield, t of DM/ha 23.0a 20.5b 17.6c 12.5d
Nigon et al., 2016
Whole-plant material
Whole-plant CS High-cut CS Toplage Snaplage
80 to 98% StarchD•Kernel particle size•Duration of silage fermentation•Kernel maturity •Endosperm properties•Additives
40 to 70% IVNDFD•Lignin/NDF•Hybrid Type•Maturity •Additives
Grain ~40-45% of WPDMStover= ~55-60% of WPDM
•Avg. 42% NDF•Variable stover:grain
Whole-Plant Corn Silage
•Avg. 30% starch in WPDM•Variable grain:stover
Variable peNDF as per chop lengthAdapted from Joe Lauer, UW Madison Agronomy Dept.
Kernel particles
2P 4P 8P 16P 32P 64P
P = pieces
Dias Junior et al., 2016; JDS
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
3 6 12 24
(% o
f Nut
rient
)
Time points (h)
WH 2P 4P 8P 16P 32P 64P
Ruminal in situ DM digestibility of unfermented kernels
Dias Junior et al., 2016; JDS
How can I obtaine excellent KPS?
• It not easy but…
• The key: adequate and constant monitoring
www.uwex.edu/ces/crops/uwforage/KernelProcessing-
FOF.pdf
The PSPS procedure is conducted manuallyusing 3 sieves (19-mm, 8-mm, and 1.18-mm) and a pan (Kononoff et al. (2003)
Particle Size
Sieve Why does it matter?
19 mm Sortable particles, may affect silage density and eating time
8 mm Physically effective fiber
1.18 or 4 mm May provide physical effective fiber / intact kernels
Pan Broken kernels / small fiber fraction
Particle Size
If using specific theoretical length of cut – why do we need to measure particle size?
Relationship between particle size and TLOC
• 64 corn silage samples obtained on farm
• Particle size measured via PSPS
• MPL calculated
• TLOC data obtained from farmer or custom harvester
• Relationships determined via Proc Reg
Salvati et al., 2017; PAS
Relationship between particle size and TLOC
(P = 0.23)
Salvati et al., 2017; PAS
Relationship between particle size and TLOC
(P = 0.01; R² = 0.10)
Same scenario when using 19 mm sieve
Salvati et al., 2017; PAS
Relationship between particle size and TLOC
Salvati et al., 2017; PAS
(P = 0.17)
• Should we keep plants longer in the field to harvest greater yields of DM and starch?
Maturity at harvest
• Poor packing
• More porosity
• More yeast and molds
• Increase shrinkage and heating
• Increase mycotoxins
• Shorten bunk life
• Lower starch and fiber digestibility
Maturity at harvest (>40% DM)
Kernel vitreousness
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Kern
el Vitre
ousn
ess
(%)
Kernel DM concentration (% of as fed)
Johnson et al. (2002) - exp. 1
Johnson et al. (2002) - exp. 2a
Johnson et al. (2002) - exp. 2b
Philippeau and Michalet-Doreau
(1997) - dent
Philippeau and Michalet-Doreau
(1997) - flint
Correa et al. (2002)
Ferraretto et al. (2015) - bm3
Ferraretto et al. (2015) - leafy-
floury
Ferraretto et al. (2015) - dual-
purpose
Ferraretto et al., 2018; JDS
84
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
< 28.1 28.1 to 32.0 32.1 to 36.0 36.1 to 40.0 > 40.0
Tot
al Tra
ct S
tarc
h D
igest
ibility (%)
Dry matter content of whole plant corn silage
Processed
Unprocessed
* ** * P < 0.0001** P < 0.01
Ferraretto and Shaver, 2012; PAS
Kernel Processing * maturity
Dry-down rates (Post-dent)
Depends on: Hybrid (stay-green characteristics)
Weather (faster when warmer and drier)
Maturity (faster as plant matures)
Adapted from slide courtesy of Dr. Bill Weiss, The Ohio State University
Average dry down = 0.5% per day(range: ~0.3 to 1.0% per day)
On average: Harvest window = 12 days
• Maturity plays a major role on corn silage quality and digestibility
• Modern hybrids are susceptible to these effects
• DM content varies within and among fields, target for 35% DM to avoid exceeding 40% DM
Take home message
Corn Silage Fermentation Increases Starch Digestibility!
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
In
Vitro
Sta
rch D
igest
ibility (%)
Fermentation Time (days)
Der Bedrosian Windle Young Ferraretto-1 Ferraretto-2 Ferraretto-3 Ferraretto-4
Figure 1. Effect of days of ensiling on ruminal in vitro starch digestibility. Data from Der Bedrosian et al., 2012; Windle et al., 2014; Young et al., 2012; Ferraretto-1, Ferraretto et al., 2015a; Ferraretto-2, Ferraretto et al., 2015b; Ferraretto-3,4, Ferrarettoet al., 2016.
Response across multiple trials
Kung et al., 2018; JDS
• Research supports the use of inventory planning so a newly harvest crop would be fed only after 90-120 days in storage
• Ensiling time does not attenuate differences in starch digestibility caused by hybrids or maturity
• It requires proper management during filling, packing and covering
Take home message
Average of 7 studies
Cutting height, cm 17 52
NDF, % 40 37
ivNDFD, % of NDF 52 56
Starch, % 32 35
Yield, t of DM/ha 17.3 15.3
Milk, kg/t 1642 1707
Milk, kg/ha 23926 22261
Normal vs. high cutting height
Ferraretto et al., 2018; JDS
Item 64K 79K 94K 109K SEM P-value
CP, % of DM 8.0a 7.5b 7.7b 7.5b 0.2 0.001
NDF, % of DM 35.7 35.6 35.5 36.1 0.7 0.89
Lignin, % of DM 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.5 0.1 0.38
ivNDFD, % of NDF 50.5 51.4 51.7 50.9 0.4 0.09
Starch, % of DM 38.6 40.1 40.2 39.5 1.0 0.46
ivSD, % of starch 54.2 55.7 55.9 55.7 0.8 0.14
Yield of DM, t/ha 17.9c 18.8b 19.7a 19.9a 0.2 0.001
Milk, kg/t 1404 1409 1408 1391 10 0.55
Milk, kg/ha 24969b 26436a 27688a 27519a 511 0.001
Plant population effects
Ferraretto et al., 2017; ADSA Abstract
• Cutting height improves quality but at the expense of reduced yield
• Cutting height may be a feasible option to improve forage quality when area is not a limiting factor
• Perhaps the combination of greater plant population and cutting height could lead to improved quality without compromising yields
Take-home message
Ear-based materialDry ground corn
High-moisture corn
Rehydrated corn
Question?
• Does particle size affects fermentation of HMC?
MPS effect
Item Coarse Fine P-value
pH 3.97 4.16 0.001
Lactate, % DM 1.55 1.84 0.001
Acetate, % DM 0.12 0.23 0.001
Aerobic Stability, h 37 59 0.15
MPS, µm 3544 906 0.001
ivSD, % starch 36.6 70.3 0.001
Saylor et al., unpublished
HMC fermented for 28 d
UF WBG Trial 5 mixture of WBG and DGC treatments
100% WBG
Mixture targeting for 60% DM
Mixture targeting for 65% DM
Mixture targeting for 70% DM
Rehydrated DGC with 70% DM (with distilled water)
6 time-points 0, 1, 3, 7, 14 and 28 days
Ferraretto et al., 2018; JDS
b c
cc
bc
b
a
a
b
b
abab
a
a
a
a
b
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
0 1 3 7 14 28WA
TE
R S
OLU
BLE
CA
RB
OH
YD
RA
TE
% O
F
DM
ENSILING TIME, D
CON 60DM 65DM 70DM REH
WBG - dry ground corn mixture
Ferraretto et al., 2018; JDS
a
ab
d e d e
b
a
a
aa
a
b
b
b b
c
c
c
b
cd
c d
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
0 1 3 7 14 28
Lac
tate
, %
of
DM
Ensiling time, d
CON 60DM 65DM 70DM REH
WBG - dry ground corn mixture
Ferraretto et al., 2018; JDS
Ferraretto et al., 2018; JDS
WBG - dry ground corn mixture
40.96 39.99
34.2237.25
44.83 46.0149.71 51.22
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
60DM 65DM 70DM REH
Rum
inal in v
itro
sta
rch d
igest
ibility,
% o
f st
arc
h0d 28d
NS ** *
Treatment P = 0.66; Time P = 0.0001; Interaction P = 0.01
• Generally contains kernels, cob, husks and shanks, plus some leaves that are snapped during the harvesting process.
• It is harvested using a self-propelled forage harvester equipped with a snapper head.
Ear-based material
Snaplage
• It contains kernels, cob, husks and shanks (and maybe some leaves), or only kernels and cob.
• It is harvested using a self-propelled forage harvester or a corn picker and grinder.
Ear-based material
Earlage
DM, % 67.1 62.5 71.8 88.1
CP, % of DM 8.4 7.7 9.2 9.4
NDF, % of DM 18.0 22.2 10.3 9.5
Starch, % of DM 63.5 61.0 69.2 72.0
TDN, % of DM 87.0 81.8 90.4 87.5
Sources: Daniel Hudson (UVM Extension); Akins and Shaver, (2014); Ferraretto et al. (2014).
Ear-based material
Earlage Snaplage HMC DGC
Item Practices
Hybrid 4 hybrids
Planting date May, 2014
Location UW - Arlington, WI
Seeds per hectare
64,000 / 79,000 / 94,000 / 109,000
Harvest date September, 2014
Maturine ½ Kernel milk line (1/2ML) or black layer (BL)
Storage 30, 60, 120 and 240 d
Inoculation Buchneri 500; Lallemand Animal Nutrition (Milkwaukee, WI)
Ear (kernels, cob, husks and shanks) were manually collected and ground using a Bear Cat SC3305SE with a 38 mm screen
Earlage production, harvest, storage
Ferraretto et al., 2016; ADSA Abstract
Nutrients
Maturity
½ ML BL
DM, % as fed 51.9 60.5
CP, %DM 7.1 6.9
Soluble CP, %CP 25.9 23.5
NDF, %DM 14.9 16.6
ADF, %DM 5.8 6.0
Starch, %DM 61.7 63.6
ivSD, % starch 52.5 42.8
Sugars, %DM 2.8 3.3
Fresh samples nutrient composition
Ferraretto et al., 2016; ADSA Abstract
* *
**
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
30 60 120 240
ivSD (% s
tarc
h)
Ensiling time (d)
1/2M
BL
Time effect (P = 0.001)Maturity effect (P = 0.01)Maturity×Time (P = 0.02)
Maturity by ensiling time
Ferraretto et al., 2016; ADSA Abstract
Implications
• Minor effects of plant population were observed.
• Starch digestibility increased with extended ensiling time, however, the negative effect of greater harvest maturity on starch digestibility was not diminished at the extended ensiling times.
Conclusions
• Many factors alter nutrient digestibility of whole-plant and fractionated corn silage
• Regardless of the feedstuff, particle size and maturity at harvest remains the most important factors to improve digestibility
• Storing feedstuffs for longer or increasing cut height may be viable options but inventory planning is required
Questions [email protected]