Ensiling characteristics of prickly pear (opuntia-ficus indica) rejects with and without molasses for animal feed

International Journal of Recycling Organic Waste in Agriculture

مقاله 23، دوره 11، شماره 4، اسفند 2022، صفحه 541-552   

نوع مقاله: Original Article

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30486/ijrowa.2022.1933535.1279

نویسندگان

L El Hajji^{* 1}؛ H Azzouzi^{1، 2}؛ M Achchoub^{1، 2}؛ K Elfazazi²؛ S Salmaoui¹

¹Ecology and sustainable development Laboratory, Faculty of Science and Technology, Sultan Moulay Slimane University, Beni Mellal, Morocco

²Laboratory of Food Science and Technology, Regional Center for Agricultural Research in Tadla (CRRAT), Beni Mellal, Morocco

چکیده

Purpose The aim of this work was to study the effect of adding sugar beet molasses on the biochemical properties, microbial flora, fermentation quality, and aerobic stability of prickly pear cactus (Opuntia ficus-indica) waste silage.
Method Molasses (0%, 2%, 4%, 6%, 8% and 10%, w/w) was mixed with the cactus fruit scraps, straw and wheat bran.
Results The dry matter content, pH, total and reducing sugars of the pre-ensiling material increased after adding different percentages of the beet molasses (P < 0.05). During fermentation, we observed substantial protein and sugar degradation. All silage treatments reached stable pH values (pH 4.3-4.6). Among all the concentrations, the 10% beet molasses treatment underwent the highest lactic acid fermentation. Accordingly, the pH drop was higher in the 10% concentration (1.13 units) compared to lower beet molasses concertation  (1.03 units). Also, the 10% concentration has the highest number of lactic acid bacteria. The number of yeast and total aerobic mesophiles decreased continuously during silage. Moreover, during post-fermentation testing, the yeast multiplied little for the 10% concentration of beet molasses.
Conclusion The results show that the addition of molasses has a significant effect on silage characteristics of prickly pear cactus.

کلیدواژه‌ها

Silage؛ Fermentation؛ Cactus rejects؛ Molasses

مراجع

Ait-Oubahou A, Bartali H (2015) Causes et importances des pertes en post-récolte de fruits et légumes au Maroc:In Cosimo L (ed) Terre et mer, ressource vitale pour la méditerranée, L’Harmatta, Paris, pp 115-131  

 Aksu T, Baytok E, Karslı MA, Muruz H (2006) Effects of formic acid, molasses and inoculant additives on corn Silage composition, organic matter digestibility and microbial protein synthesis in sheep. Small  Rumin Res 61(1):29–33.            https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2004.12.013

APHA (1989) standard methods for examination of water and waste water. Anal Biochem 1:183  

Basso FC, Bernardes TF, Roth AP de TP, Lodo BN, Berchielli TT,  Reis RA (2012) Fermentation and aerobic stability of corn silage inoculated with Lactobacillus buchneri. Rev Bras de Zootec 41(7):1789–1794

Bendaou M (2013) Method  for  producing  silage  containing  cactus and argan-tree product. WIPO, INRA, WO2013/105844Al.  https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2013105841A1/en

Ben Salem H, Nefzaoui A, Ben Salem L (2002) Supplementation of Acacia cyanophylla Lindl. foliage-based diets with barley or shrubs from arid areas (Opuntia ficus-indica f. inermis and Atriplex nummularia L.) on  growth and digestibility in lambs. Anim Feed Sci Tech 96:1-2. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-  8401(01)00338-8

Bertrand G (1906) Dosage of reducing sugars. Bul Soc Chim 35:1285-1299

Bilal MQ (2009) Effect of molasses and corn as silage additives on the characteristics of mott dwarf elephant grass silage at different fermentation periods. Pakistan Vet J 29(1):19-23. http://pvj.com.pk/pdf-files/29_1/19-23.pdf

Bolsen KK, Ashbell G, Weinberg ZG (1996) Silage fermentation and silage additives-Review. Asian Australas J Anim Sci 9:5 483–494. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.1996.483

Cai Y, Kumai S, Ogawa M, Benno Y, Nakase T (1999) Characterization and identification of pediococcus species isolated from forage crops and their application for silage preparation. Appl Environ Microbiol 65(7).          https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.65.7.2901-2906.1999

Capozzi V, Fiocco D, Amodio ML, Gallone A, Spano G (2009) Bacterial stressors in minimally processed food. Int J Mol Sci 10:3076-3105. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms10073076

Castra J, Perez S, Riquelme E (1977) Evaluation of thornless prickly pear silages as feedstuff for ruminants. Proc West Sect Am Soc Anim Sci 28:127-128

Dubois M, Gilles K, Hamilton JK, Rebers PA, Smith F (1951) Colorimetric method for determination of sugar. Nature 168, 167. https://doi.org/10.1038/168167a0

El Hajji L, Salmaoui S (2020) Biochemical and microbiological characterization of prickly pear rejects. Int J In Innov Res Sci Eng Technol 5(7):608-615

Habibi Y (2004) Contribution  to the morphological, ultrastructural and chemical study of prickly pear. Cermav, Morocco, Thesis. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00006273

Hara S, Ohyama Y (1978) Propionic acid application in preventing aerobic deterioration of silage, with reference to the relationship to moisture content and additive tolerant microorganisms. Jan J Zootech Sci 49:794-801

Heinritz SN, Martens SD, Avila P, Hoedtke S (2012) The effect of inoculant and sucrose addition on the silage quality of tropical forage legumes with varying ensilability. Anim Feed Sci Tech 174(3-4):201–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2012.03.017

Hinds MA, Bolsen KK, Brethour J, Milliken G, Hoover J (1985) Effects of molasses/urea and bacterial inoculant additives on silage quality, dry matter recovery, and feeding value for cattle. Anim Feed Sci Tech 12(3):205–214.        https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(85)90014-8

Jaurena G, Pichard G (2001) Contribution of storage and structural polysaccharides to the fermentation process and nutritive value of lucerne ensiled alone or mixed with cereal grains. Anim Feed Sci Tech 92(3-4):159–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(01)00257-7

Kennedy SJ (1990) Comparison of the fermentation quality and nutritive value of sulphuric and formic acid-treated silages fed to beef cattle. Grass Forage Sci 45(1):17–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1990.tb02178.x

Kung JrL, Shaver RD, Grant RJ, Schmidt RJ (2018) Silage review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial, and organoleptic components of silages. J Dairy Sci 101(5):4020–4033. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13909

Lattemae P, Ohlsson C, Lingvall P (1996) The combined effect of molasses and formic acid on quality of red colver silage. Swed J Agri Res 23(1):31-41

Le Houérou HN (1992) The role of saltbushes (Atriplex spp.) in arid land rehabilitation in the Mediterranean Basin, A review. Agrofor Sys 18(2):107–148.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(93)90252-V

Leininger HV (1976) Equipment, media, regent routine tests and strains. In the compendium of methods for the microbial examination of foods. LN Speak, APHA, Washington, pp 11–94

Mabrouk A, Abbas Y, Fakiri M, Benchekroun M, El Kharrassi Y, El Antary-Tazi S, El Mzouni E (2016) Caractérisation phénologyque de différentes écotypes de cactus (opuntia spp.) Marocaines dans les conditions édapho-climatiques de la région de Chaouia-Ourdigha. J Mater Environ Sci 7(4):1396-1405. http://webagris.inra.org.ma/doc/elmzouri0316.pdf

McDonald P, Henderson AR,  Heron SJE (1991) The biochemistry of silage. Chalcombe publications, UK

McDonald P, Edwards RA, Greenhalgh JFD, Morgan CA (2002) Animal nutrition 6th edition. Longman scientific and technical, USA, John Wiley and Sons

Mokoboki K, Sebola N, Matlabe G (2016) Effects of molasses levels and growing conditions on nutritive value and fermentation quality of Opuntia cladodes silage. J Anim Plant Sci 28(3):4488–4495          

Moore CA, Kennedy SJ (1994) The effect of sugar beet pulp-based silage additives on effluent production, fermentation, in-silo losses, silage intake and animal performance. Grass Forage Sci 49(1):54–64.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1994.tb01976.x 

Muck RE,  Pitt RE (1993) Ensiling and its effect on crop quality. Proc Natl Silage Prod Conf Syracuse NY NRAES-67 Northeast Reg Agric Ext Serv, Ithaca, NY, pp 57–66

Muck RE, Moser LE, Pitt RE (2003) Postharvest factors affecting ensiling in Dwayne R, Buxton, Richard E, Muck, Joseph H, Harrison (ed) Silage Science and Technology, 42, American Society of Agronomy, Inc., Crop Science Society of America, Inc., Soil Science Society of America, Inc. pp 251–304

Nefzaoui A (2000) Nutritive value of spineless cactus (Opuntia ficus indica var. inermis) and atriplex-(Atriplex nummularia) based diets for sheep. Proceedings of the Workshop on Native and Exotic Fodder Shrubs in Arid and Semi-Arid Zones 1996, Hammamet, Tunisia, October 27 - November 2, pp 518–52

Ni K, Wang F, Zhu B, Yang J, Zhou G, Pan YI, Tao Y, Zhong J (2017) Effects of lactic acid bacteria and molasses additives on the microbial community and fermentation quality of soybean silage. Bioresour Technol 238: 706–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.04.055 

Nobel PS (2002) Cacti: Biology and uses. Univ of California Press Pettersson K (1988) Ensiling of forages. Factors affecting silage fermentation and quality. Thesis, 179

Piga A (2004) Cactus pear: A fruit of nutraceutical and functional importance. J Prof Assoc Cactus Dev 6:9–22.          https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.319.6763&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Shahsavan A (2009) A study on the effects of enzymes and molasses on the nutritional value of reed silage in Sistan silos. MA thesis of Animal Feed, Agriculture Faculty of Zabol University, p 100

Shellito SM, Ward MA, Lardy GP, Bauer ML,  Caton JS (2006) Effects of concentrated separator by-product (desugared molasses) on intake, ruminal fermentation, digestion, and microbial efficiency in beef steers fed grass hay1. J Anim Sci 84(6):1535–1543. https://doi.org/10.2527/2006.8461535x 

Shoop MC, Alford EJ, Mayland HF (1977) Plains pricklypear is a good forage for cattle. J Range Manag 30(1):12. https://doi.org/10.2527/2006.8461535x 

Spoelstra SF, Steg A, Beuvink JMW (1990) Application of cell wall degrading enzymes to grass silage. JJ Dekkers, HC van Der Plas & DH Vuijk (Eds.). 165-172

Stintzing FC, Schieber A, Carle R (2001) Phytochemical and nutritional significance of cactus pear. Eur Food Res Technol 212(4):396–407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002170000219

Tazi S, Naimi N, Hazzam R, Boularouah Z, Rifi O, Janoune A, Dana A (2014) Second national report on the state of animal genetic resources, Morocco, 46

Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA (1991) Metods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non starch polusaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 74:3583-3597

Weise F (1967) The action of feed quality sugar as a safety additive for grass silage. Landwirt. Forsch 20:171–184

Woolford MK (1990) The detrimental effects of air on silage. J Appl Microbiol 68(2):101–116.          https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.1990.tb02554.x 

Wuisman Y, Hiraoka H, Yahaya MS, Takeda M, Kim W, Takahashi T, Karita S, Horiguchi K, Takahashi T, Goto M (2006) Effects of phenylalanine fermentation byproduct and sugarcane molasses on fermentation quality and rumen degradation of whole crop barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) silage in situ. Grassl Sci 52(2):73–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-697x.2006.00050.x 

Yang CMJ, Huang SC, Chang T, Cheng YH, Chang CT (2004) Fermentation acids, aerobic fungal growth, and intake of napiergrass ensiled with nonfiber carbohydrates. J Dairy Sci 87(3):630–636.  https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(04)73205-1