摘要

现阶段，随着我国农业供给侧结构性改革和规模化养殖的深入推进，优质青贮饲料的需求持续攀升。全株玉米，因其卓越的储存性、良好的口感、较低的营养损失和高效的营养成分消化率，已成为反刍动物饲养中不可或缺的粗饲料来源。但目前通过添加发酵剂处理全株玉米青贮仍存在发酵效果不好、易腐败等问题，从而影响反刍动物的生长性能，因此为了解决这一问题。本试验主要针对全株玉米青贮添加剂的开发进行了相关试验的研究，其目的在于研发出一种可以提高全株玉米青贮品质的复合型添加剂。本试验分为以下三个部分：

不同发酵剂对全株玉米青贮的发酵效果评定

本试验旨在探讨不同添加剂对全株玉米的发酵效果，并对其发酵效果或进行综合评价。试验共设计4个处理组:对照组（CON）、嗜酸乳杆菌组(H1)、复合菌1号组（H2）、复合菌2号组（H3），复合发酵剂（H2）为乳酸片球菌（活菌数1.0×10⁹ CFU/g）、植物乳杆菌(活菌数1.0×10⁸ CFU/g)和布氏乳杆菌（活菌数1.0×10⁸ CFU/g），复合发酵剂（H3）为实验室保存菌种（植物乳杆菌、嗜酸乳杆菌、枯草芽孢杆菌、罗伊氏乳杆菌、动物双歧杆菌、产朊假丝酵母和嗜热链球菌）。于发酵第10d、20d、30d、40d时开袋取样，进行发酵品质、营养成分等指标的测定。试验结果表明，添加H1、H2、H3发酵剂后均可以提高全株青贮玉米中DM、CP、EE、LA、AA、PA的含量，降低pH与ADF的含量。在感官评价方面，全株青贮玉米感官评分依次为H3>H2=H1>CON。在有氧暴露阶段，各处理组pH随着有氧暴露时间的增加逐渐升高，其中CON、H1、H2组存在极显著差异（P<0.01），H3组存在显著差异（P<0.05）。CON、H1、H2均出现DM、CP、NDF、LA含量的降低，并存在显著性差异（P<0.05），而H3组只有NDF、LA含量存在显著差异，同时H3组的有氧稳定性时间最长。综上所述，H3添加剂发酵全株玉米青贮可以减少发酵过程中对营养成分的损失，改善发酵品质，还可以提高有氧稳定性。

不同发酵剂处理全株玉米青贮对瘤胃体外发酵的影响

本试验旨在研究不同发酵剂处理全株玉米青贮的饲用价值评定。在全株玉米发酵完全即40 d时，采用体外瘤胃实验，通过对瘤胃发酵参数、体外消化率、体外产气量等指标的测定来评价其在瘤胃中的发酵结果。试验共设计4个处理组:对照组(CON)、嗜酸乳杆菌组(H1)、复合菌1号组(H2)、复合菌2号组(H3)。试验结果表明，各组pH、氨态氮、乳酸均在正常范围内；其中CON组与各试验组之间pH、氨态氮、总挥发酸、乙酸、丙酸、乙酸/丙酸值均存在极显著差异（P<0.01），H3组相比于其他各组间也均存在极显著差异（P<0.01），说明H3组发酵剂可以显著促进乙酸含量的增加，乙酸/丙酸比例的变化也说明添加发酵剂后对于全株青贮玉米的营养价值有显著提高。各试验组与CON组干物质、中性洗涤纤维、酸性洗涤纤维体外消化率均有极显著差异（P<0.01），其中H3组干物质、酸性洗涤纤维消化率极显著高于CON、H1、H2组（P<0.01），H3组粗蛋白和中性洗涤纤维体外消化率极显著高于CON组（P<0.01）。综上所诉，使用添加剂发酵全株青贮玉米对反刍动物的消化能力有促进作用，且添加H3处理全株玉米青贮的饲用价值评定最优。

不同发酵剂处理全株玉米青贮的微生物多样性分析

本试验旨在研究不同发酵剂处理全株玉米青贮的多样性分析。本试验结合试验一与试验二的结果，对对照组(CON)、复合菌1号组(H2)、复合菌2号组(H3)进行微生物多样性分析。试验结果表明，H3组的细菌群落种类与丰富度要高于CON、H2组，细菌群落种类与丰富度要低于CON、H2组。通过对处理组全株青贮玉米细菌属、门水平上的物种成分分析可以发现，H3组厚壁菌门水平比CON、H2高，同时H3组植物乳杆菌属水平比CON、H2高，而CON组醋杆菌属水平比H2、H3组高，说明相比于H2、H3组更容易腐败。在真菌群落多样性分析中，H3组真菌多样性、真菌群落种类与丰富度要低于CON、H2组。通过对处理组全株青贮玉米真菌属、门水平上的物种成分分析可以发现，各组间子囊菌门水平相似，而H3组担子菌门水平高于CON、H2组。同时H3组镰刀菌属与曲霉菌属水平极显著低于CON、H2组。综上所述，说明H3添加剂更适合厚壁菌门发挥作用，抑制有害菌生长，更好的改善全株青贮玉米的发酵效果。

通过以上试验结果可知，H3发酵剂可以改善发酵品质，减少营养成分损失，并且对反刍动物消化能力有促进作用。

关键词：全株青贮玉米；发酵品质；瘤胃发酵；微生物多样性；

Abstract

At present, with the deepening of the structural reform of China's agricultural supply side and large-scale breeding, the demand for high-quality silage continues to rise. Whole corn, because of its excellent storage, good taste, low nutrient loss and high nutrient digestibility, has become an indispensable source of roughage in ruminant feeding. However, at present, there are still some problems such as poor fermentation effect and easy spoilage, which affect the growth performance of ruminants, so in order to solve this problem. This experiment mainly aimed at the development of whole corn silage additives, its purpose is to develop a compound additive can improve the quality of whole corn silage. This experiment is divided into the following three parts:

1. Evaluation of fermentation effect of different starter cultures on whole corn silage

The purpose of this experiment was to investigate the fermentation effect of different additives on whole corn, and to evaluate the fermentation effect comprehensively. A total of 4 treatment groups were designed: control group (CON), Lactobacillus acidophilus group (H1), complex bacteria group 1 (H2) and complex bacteria group 2 (H3). Samples were opened on the 10d, 20d, 30d and 40d of fermentation, and the fermentation quality and nutrient composition were determined. The results showed that adding H1, H2 and H3 starter cultures could increase the contents of DM, CP, EE, LA, AA and PA, and decrease the contents of pH and ADF in whole silage maize. In terms of sensory evaluation, the sensory scores of whole silage maize were H3>H2=H1>CON. In the aerobic exposure stage, the pH of all treatment groups increased gradually with the increase of aerobic exposure time, and there were extremely significant differences in CON, H1 and H2 groups (P<0.01), and significant differences in H3 group (P<0.05). The contents of DM, CP, NDF and LA in CON, H1 and H2 were decreased significantly (P<0.05), while only the contents of NDF and LA were significantly different in H3 group, and the aerobic stability time in H3 group was the longest. In summary, the fermentation of whole corn silage with H3 additive can reduce the loss of nutrients during fermentation, improve the fermentation quality, and improve the aerobic stability.

2. Effects of whole corn silage treated with different starter cultures on rumen fermentation in vitro

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feeding value of whole corn silage treated with different starter cultures. In vitro rumen experiment was conducted to evaluate rumen fermentation results by measuring rumen fermentation parameters, in vitro digestibility, in vitro gas production and so on when the whole corn was completely fermented for 40 days. Four treatment groups were designed: control group (CON), Lactobacillus acidophilus group (H1), complex bacteria group 1 (H2) and complex bacteria group 2 (H3). The results showed that the pH, ammonia nitrogen and lactic acid of all groups were within the normal range. There were significant differences in pH, ammonia nitrogen, total volatile acid, acetic acid, propionic acid and acetic acid/propionic acid values between CON group and experimental groups (P<0.01), and there were also significant differences in H3 group compared with other groups (P<0.01), indicating that starter culture in H3 group could significantly promote the increase of acetic acid content. The change of acetic acid/propionic acid ratio also indicated that the nutritional value of whole silage maize was significantly improved after adding starter culture. The in vitro digestibility of dry matter, neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber of experimental groups and CON group were significantly different (P<0.01), and the digestibility of dry matter and acid detergent fiber of H3 group was significantly higher than that of CON, H1 and H2 groups (P<0.01). The in vitro digestibility of crude protein and neutral detergent fiber in H3 group was significantly higher than that in CON group (P<0.01). In conclusion, the use of additives to ferment whole corn silage can promote the digestion capacity of ruminants, and the feeding value evaluation of whole corn silage treated with H3 is the best.

3. Microbial diversity analysis of whole maize silage treated with different starter cultures

The aim of this experiment was to study the diversity analysis of whole corn silage treated with different starter cultures. The microbial diversity of control group (CON), complex bacteria group 1 (H2) and complex bacteria group 2 (H3) was analyzed in combination with the results of trial 1 and trial 2. The results showed that the species and richness of bacterial community in H3 group were higher than those in CON and H2 group, and the species and richness of bacterial community were lower than those in CON and H2 group. Through the analysis of species composition at the level of bacteria genera and phyla of whole plant silage maize in the treatment group, it was found that the level of Firmicutea in group H3 was higher than that of CON and H2, the level of Lactobacillus plant in group H3 was higher than that of CON and H2, and the level of acetobacter in group CON was higher than that of H2 and H3, indicating that it was more susceptible to corruption than that of groups H2 and H3. In the analysis of fungal community diversity, the diversity, species and richness of fungal community in H3 group were lower than those in CON and H2 group. The species composition analysis of whole plant silage maize at fungi genera and phyla level showed that ascomycetes were similar in all groups, while basidiomycetes were higher in H3 group than in CON and H2 group. Meanwhile, the levels of Fusarium and Aspergillus in H3 group were significantly lower than those in CON and H2 groups. To sum up, it shows that H3 additive is more suitable for Firmicutes to play a role, inhibit the growth of harmful bacteria, and better improve the fermentation effect of whole silage maize.

According to the above results, H3 starter culture can improve the fermentation quality, reduce the loss of nutrients, and promote the digestion of ruminants.

Key words: whole silage maize; fermentation quality; rumen fermentation; microbial diversity;

[1]张洪艳.青贮饲料的种类、营养价值及其在反刍动物养殖中的应用[J].四川畜牧兽医,2024,51(02):35-37.
[2]Ferraretto L F , Shaver R D , Luck B D . Silage review recent advances and future technologies for whole-plant and fractionated corn silage harvesting[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2018, 101(5):3937-3951.
[3]武艳玲.青贮饲料制作与营养价值[J].中国畜禽种业,2020,16(08):64-65.
[4]Weinberg Z G，MuckＲE． New trends and opportunities in the development and use of inoculants for silage [J].FEMS Microbiology Ｒeviews，1996,(19): 53-68．
[5]王斐,何振富,陈平,等.青贮甜高粱替代不同比例甜高粱青干草对德州驴驹生长性能、营养物质消化率及血清生化指标的影响[J].动物营养学报,2021,33(08):4560-4568.
[6]刘杰,杨蜜,金孟达,等.青贮饲料营养价值、影响因素及其在家畜生产中的应用[J].中国畜牧杂志,2024,60(02):58-64.
[7]张适,吴琼,尤欢,等.北方寒冷地区青贮饲料的制作及其影响因素[J].饲料研究,2019,42(10):97-101.
[8]乌云其其格.浅谈青贮饲料的推广与应用[J].农业工程术，2017,37(11)：70-72.
[9]钱永亮.全株青贮玉米在肉牛养殖中的应用[J].山东畜牧兽医,2024,45(01):41-43.
[10]马培杰,李亚娇,吴佳海,等.不同青贮饲料对肉牛生产性能与经济效益的影响 [J].贵州农业科学,2020,48(03):87-89.
[11]许岳军,付薇,周丽,等.不同饲草青贮料对肉牛育肥效果及经济效益分析[J].现 代畜牧科技,2022,(05):37-39.
[12]孙炬仁,赵武恒.青贮饲料的营养价值及其在反刍动物中的应用[J].中国饲料, 2022,(10):5-8.
[13]房巍慧.青贮饲料对肉羊生长发育及肉品质量的影响[J].中国畜禽种业,2021, 17(12):116-117.
[14]曹亮,赵文昌,李德宏,等.青贮玉米不同处理方式对肉羊生长性能、屠宰性能、 肉品质及抗氧化能力影响[J].饲料研究,2022,45(06):14-17.
[15]苗芳.同/异质型乳酸菌对玉米青贮品质及有氧稳定性的影响[D].石河子大学, 2017.
[16]杨佳,李琦华,安清聪,等.不同青贮添加剂对全株玉米青贮品质的影响[J].饲料 博览,2022,(06):46-51.DOI:10.20041/j.cnki.slbl.2022.06.009.
[17]李金俐,董起飞,杨国义,等.不同添加剂对全株玉米青贮的影响[J].中国草食动 物科学,2018,38(04):33-36.
[18]丁婉.布氏乳杆菌对不同含水量玉米青贮品质影响研究[D].山西农业大学,20 16.
[19]REICH L J, KUNG L M. Effects of combining Lactobacillus buch⁃neri 4 0788 with various lactic acid bacteria on the fermentation and aerobic sta bility of corn silage[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2010, 159(3 /4): 105-109.
[20]洪梅,刁其玉,姜成钢,等.布氏乳杆菌对青贮发酵及其效果的研究进展[J].草业 学报,2011,20(05):266-271.
[21]马伊丹,纪鹏,安清聪,等.不同乳酸菌青贮剂对桥单6号全株玉米青贮品质的 影响[J].养殖与饲料,2024,23(01):41-46.DOI:10.13300/j.cnki.cn42-1648/s.2024. 01.031.
[22]Filya I, Muck I, Contreras R E. Inoculant effects on alfalfa silage:ferment ation products and nutritive value[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2007,90:5:1 08-114.
[23]付清茂.收获时间、贮存时间及添加剂对玉米秸秆营养价值的影响[D].新疆农 业大学,2008.
[24]牛琼梅,初晓辉,李彦飞,等.不同种类添加剂对全株玉米发酵特性及营养品质 的影响[J].饲料研究,2024,47(01):93-98.DOI:10.13557/j.cnki.issn1002-2813.20 24.01.017.
[25]高国臣, 齐宝林.日本青贮饲料的生产与防止二次发酵的技术[J].吉林农业科 学, 2005, 30(4): 51-52.
[26]哈尔阿力, 刘艳丰.微生物青贮添加剂的研究进展[J].中国畜牧业, 2012,(18): 64-65.
[27]Mills J A,Kung L. The effect of delayed ensiling and application of a pro pionic acid-based additive on the fermentation of barley silage.[J]. Journal of Dairy Science,2002,85(8):48-52.
[28]Ashbell G, Lisker N. Aerobic deterioration in maize silage stored in a bu nker silo under farm conditions in a subtropical climate[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 1988, 45(4): 307-315.
[29]Woolford M K. The detrimental effects of air on silage.[J]. Journal of Ap plied Bacteriology, 1990, 68(2): 101-105.
[30]A Jonsson, G Pahlow. Systematic classification and biochemical characteriz ation of yeasts growing in grass silage inoculated with Lactobacillus cultur es. [J].Journal of Dairy Science,1984,05(2):54-58.
[31]陈广银, 郑正, 罗艳, 等.碱处理对秸秆厌氧消化的影响[J].环境科学2010,31 (9): 2208-2213.
[32]赵长友, 张国立, 刘玉英.青黄贮中添加纤维素酶防止和延缓二次发酵的研 究报告[J].现代畜牧兽医, 1994,(4): 9-11.
[33]Weinberg, Z G. and R. E. Muck. New trends and oPPortunities in the de veloPment and use of inoculants for silage. FEMS Microbiological Review s [J].1996,28 (19):53-68.
[34]白杰, 李德芳, 陈安国, 等.添加蔗糖和甲酸对红麻青贮饲料品质的影响[J]. 中国麻业科学, 2016, (05): 212-221.
[35]赵雪莉. 白腐真菌发酵对玉米秸秆纤维降解和绵羊饲喂价值的影响 [D]; 西 南大学.、
[36]冯宗慈, 高民 通过比色测定瘤胃液氨氮含量方法的改进 [J].内蒙古畜牧科 学 2010, (04): 40-41.
[37]杨平平, 甄玉国, 郑艳秋,等. 优化对羟基联苯法定量测定瘤胃液中乳酸含 量[J].畜牧与饲料科学 2013, 34(2): 1-2，5.
[38]GB/T 6433-2006:饲料中粗脂肪含量的测定: [S]. 2006:
[39]GB/T 20806-2022:饲料中中性洗涤纤维(NDF)的测定: [S]. 国家市场监督管 理总局;国家标准化管理委员会, 2022: 16.
[40]NY/T 1459-2007:饲料中酸性洗涤纤维的测定: [S].
[41]GB/T 6438-2007:饲料中粗灰分的测定: [S]. 国内-国家标准-国家市场监督 管理总局 CN-GB, 2007:
[42]穆胜龙,周波,杨冉冉,刘敏燕,靳艺,李媛媛,邹彩霞,何仁春.枯草芽孢杆菌和布 氏乳杆菌对甘蔗尾青贮品质的影响[J].饲料研究,2017(15):24-30.
[43]刘建新.干草秸秆青贮饲料加工技术[M].北京:中国农业大学出版社,2004:180 -194.
[44]自给饲料品质评价研究会. 粗饲料品质评价方法[M]. 东京: 日本草地畜产 种子协会, 2001: 91-101.
[45]唐庆凤,彭开屏,韦升菊等.布氏乳杆菌、黑曲霉、热带假丝酵母、枯草芽孢杆 菌与植物乳杆菌3菌组合对木薯渣发酵品质的影响[J].中国畜牧兽医,2016,4 3(07):1729-1736.DOI:10.16431/j.cnki.1671-7236.2016.07.011.
[46]Junior VHB, Fortaleza APDS, Junior FLM. Aerobic stability in cor n silage (Zea mays L.) ensiled with different microbial additives[J]. Acta Scientiarum Animal Sciences, 2017, 39(04): 357-362.
[47]Filya I .The Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri and Lactobacillus Plantarum on the Fermentation, Aerobic Stability, and Ruminal Degradability of Low Dry Matter Corn and Sorghum Silages[J].Journal of Dairy Science,2003,86(11):3575-3581.
[48]凌文卿,张磊,李珏等.布氏乳杆菌和不同糖类联用对紫花苜蓿青贮营养成分、 发酵品质、瘤胃降解率及有氧稳定性的影响[J].草业学报,2023,32(07):122-13 4.
[49]高巧仙,朱万清,李晓梅等.添加纤维素酶和布氏乳杆菌对葡萄渣全混合日粮 发酵品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J].中国饲料,2022,(13):28-33.DOI:10.15906/j. cnki.cn11-2975/s.20221306.
[50]任海伟,石瑞锋,魏慧元等.菌/酶添加对甜高粱渣青贮预处理作用的强化效果 [J].农业工程学报,2023,39(06):224-236.
[51]代友超,马越,徐美玲,等.玉米品种和发酵剂对全株玉米青贮营养品质的影响 [J].动物营养学报,2024,36(01):658-671.
[52]袁仕改,陈超,张明均等.添加剂对温湿生境青贮玉米发酵品质及有氧稳定性 的影响[J].草地学报,2018,26(04):942-947.
[53]王莹,玉柱.不同添加剂对紫花苜蓿青贮发酵品质的影响[J].中国草地学报,20 10,32(05):80-84.
[54]Wilkinson J. and Davies D.. The aerobic stability of silage: key findings and recent developments. Grass Forage Sci.,2013,68(1):1-19
[55]Blajman J E, et al.A meta-analysis on the effectiveness of homofermentati ve and heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria for corn silage.Journal of a PPlied microbiology 125.6(2018):1655-1669.
[56]Filya ISucu E,and Karabulut A.The effects of ProPionibacterium acidiProPi onici and Lactobacillus Plantarum, aPPlied at ensiling, on the fermentation and aerobic stability of low dry matter corn and sorghum silages.Journal of industrial microbiology biotechnology 33.5(2006):353-8.
[57]张敏.西藏乡土乳酸菌对牧草青贮发酵品质的改善效果[D].南京农业大学,2016.
[58]贾瑞芳,刘长岗.全株玉米青贮对南阳黄牛生长性能、养分消化率及瘤胃发酵 参数的影响[J].中国草食动物科学,2023,43(3):65-70.
[59]程光民,陈凤梅,张永翠,等.全株玉米青贮中乳酸片球菌及其与尿素混合添加 对杜泊绵羊消化代谢、血清生化和瘤胃发酵指标的影响[J].动物营养学报,20 19,31(11):5274-5282.
[60]王亚芳,姜富贵,成海建,等.不同青贮添加剂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,2020,32(6):2765-2774.
[61]刘宏伟,杨同明,吕娜,等.不同处理方法的全株玉米青贮对奶牛生产性能、瘤 胃发酵参数及血清生化指标的影响[J/OL].饲料研究,2024,(04):18-22[2024-04-05].https://doi.org/10.13557/j.cnki.issn1002-2813.2024.04.004.
[62]王祖艳,曲永利,张帅,等.不同添加剂处理全株玉米青贮对奶牛瘤胃发酵参数 和菌群结构的影响[J].动物营养学报,2021,33(4):2093-2103.
[63]张云凯,剧勍,刘泽,等.不同青贮添加剂的全株玉米青贮对肉羊生长性能、养 分表观消化率及血清生化指标的影响[J].饲料研究,2023,46(7):10-14.
[64]Menke K H, Steingass H. Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid [J]. Anim Res Dev, 1988, 28(5): 47-55.
[65]Salawu m b，Acamovica T，Stewart c s，et al. The use of ta nnins as silage additives:Effects on silage composition and mobile bag dis a ppearance of dry matter and protein[J].Animal Feed Science and Techno logy,1999,82:243-259.
[66]Lixz,Yancg,Choish,etal.Effects of addition leve l and chenecal type of propionate precursors in dicarboxylic acid pathway on fermentation charact eristics and methane production by rumen microbes invitro[J].Asian-Austral asian Journal of Animal Sciences,2009,22:82-89.
[67]孙金艳,彭福刚,赵秀华,等.发酵玉米秸秆对泌乳期奶牛瘤胃发酵参数的影响 [J].中国饲料,2014,17:20-22.
[68]武安泉,陈龙,朱自学,等.乳酸发酵的干玉米秸秆对波尔山羊生长性能和瘤胃 发酵参数的影响[J].中国饲料,2015,10:29-30.
[69]王志敬,吴征敏,庄桂锋,等.不同精粗比日粮对雷州山羊体外瘤胃发酵的影响 [J].中国畜牧兽医,2017,44(8):2303-2310.
[70]Thao N T，Wanapat M，Cherdthong A，et al. Effects of eucalyptus crude oils supplementation on rumen fermentation，microorganism and nutrient di gestibility in swamp buffaloes［J］. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences,2014,27(1):46-54.
[71]辛杭书,刘凯玉,张永根,等.不同处理水稻秸秆对体外瘤胃发酵模式､甲烷产量 和微生物区系的影响[J].动物营养学报,2015,27(5):1632-1640.
[72]杜瑞平.绵羊瘤胃乙酸和T酸的产生､吸收和利用规律及可代谢生脂物(MLS) 的测定[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2006.
[73]周雪飞,甄玉国,张学峰,等.不同添加剂量的酵母培养物对绵羊瘤胃发酵的影 响[J].中国畜牧杂志,2015,51(21):49-53.
[74]Han H Y,Wang C,Huang Z P,et al. Effects of lactic acid bacteriainoculated corn silage on bacterial communities and metabolites of digestive tract of sheep[J]. Fermentation,2022,8(7):320-320.
[75]郝建祥.体外发酵法评定反刍动物饲料营养价值的研究[D].硕士学位论文.南 京: 南京农业大学,2011．
[76]李袁飞,郝建祥,马艳艳,等.体外瘤胃发酵法评定不同类型饲料的营养价值[J]. 动物营养学报,2013,25(10):2403-2413．
[77]万学瑞,吴建平,雷赵民,等.优良抑菌活性乳酸菌对玉米青贮及有氧暴露期微 生物数量和 pH 的影响[J]. 草业学报,2016,25(4) :204-211．
[78]Pande S,Kost C. Bacteria uncultureability and the formation of intercelluar metabolic networks [J]. Trends Microbiology, 2017,25( 5) : 349 - 361.
[79]李雁冰,玉柱,孙娟娟.不同乳酸菌添加剂对青贮黑麦草和青贮玉米微生物群 集的影响[J].草地学报,2015,23(2):387-393．
[80]隋鸿园,侯成立,周雨霞.适合作青贮接种剂植物乳杆菌的筛选[J].饲料研究,20 12(12):68-69.
[81]Garrido - Cardenas J A,Manzano - Agugliaro F. The metagenomics world wide research[J].Current Genetics,2017,63(5):819-829.
[82]White R A,Callister S J,Moore R J. The past,present and future of microb iome analyses[J].Nature Protocols,2016,11(11):2049-2053.
[83]Degnan P H,Ochman H. Illumina - based analysis of microbial community diversity[J].The ISME Journal,2012,6(1):183-194.
[84]Qin J,Li R,Raes J,et al. A human gut microbial gene catalogue established by metagenomic sequencing[J].Nature,2010,464(7285):59-65.
[85]Hu Y,Yang X,Qin J,et al. Metagenome-wide analysis of antibiotic resistanc e genes in a large cohort of human gut microbiota[J].Nature Communicati ons,2013,4:2151.
[86]熊乙,赵燕梅,许庆方,等.五个地区玉米青贮菌群多样性的研究[J].草学,2017 (5):16-22.
[87]闫绍鹏,杨瑞华,冷淑娇,等.高通量测序技术及其在农业科学研究的应用[J].中 国农学通报,2012,28(30):171-176.
[88]Bolyen, Evan, et al. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible micr obiome data science using QIIME 2. Nature biotechnology 37.8 (2019): 8 52-857.
[89]Callahan, B., McMurdie, P., Rosen, M. et al. DADA2: High-resolution sa mple inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods 13, 581–583 (2 016).
[90]Grice EA, Kong HH, et al. (2009). Topographical and temporal diversity of the human skin microbiome. Science, 324(5931): 1190–1192.
[91]梁龙飞.贵州不同区域全株玉米青贮过程中的菌群动态变化研究[D].贵州大 学,2020.DOI:10.27047/d.cnki.ggudu.2020.001407.
[92]Tohno M, Kitahara M, Irisawa T, Masuda T, Uegaki R, Ohkuma M, Taji maK. Lactobacillus silagei sp. nov. Isolated from orchardgrass silage[J]. In ternational Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 2013, 63 (12): 4613-4618.
[93]詹发强, 包慧芳, 崔卫东, 王炜. 玉米青贮过程中乳酸菌动态变化[J]. 微生 物学通报, 2010, 37(6): 834-838
[94]闫峻. 玉米青贮饲料开窖后贮存期营养成分及霉菌变化规律研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2009.
[95]Drouin P, Tremblay J, Renaud J, Apper E. Microbiota succession during a erobic stability of maize silage inoculated with Lentilactobacillus buchneri NCIMB40788 and Lentilactobacillus hilgardii CNCM-I-4785[J]. Microbiolo gy Open, 2020, 10(01): e1153.
[96]米筱.压实密度和二次发酵对全株玉米青贮品质的影响[D].山东农业大学,20 22.DOI:10.27277/d.cnki.gsdnu.2022.001064.
O'brien,M.,Egan,D.,O"kiely,P.,Forristal,P.D.,Doohan,F.M.and Fuller, H.T..Mor phological and molecular characterisation of P.roqueforti and P. paneum is olated from baled grass silage. Mycol.Res.,2008,112,