Nutritional Value Change during Processing Forage Block from Under-Forest Interplanting Lolium Perenne

Article Preview

Abstract:

In order to make use of the under-forest economy, Lolium perenne were interplanted under the trees, and the effect of coarse fodder processing on the nutrient content of under-forest interplanting Lolium perenne was analyzed. The result showed that the contents of calcium and phosphorus of under-forest interplanting Lolium perenne were 0.79% and 0.119%, while those of forage blocks processed were 0.82% and 0.115%, and the one starch-added were 0.74% and 0.125%, respectively. The calcium contents were 0.51%, 0.67% and 0.76% when the ratio of Lolium multiflorum/ Illicium verum were 100:1, 200:1 and 300:1 in the processed forage blocks, and the phosphorus contents were 0.121%, 0.123% and 0.127%, respectively. The results suggested that the coarse fodder processing and additive have no obvious influence on the mineral nutrients of Lolium perenne during forage block processing, and the optimal ratio of Lolium perenne/ Illicium verum is 300:1 in the forage.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 1073-1076)

Pages:

1849-1853

Citation:

Online since:

December 2014

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2015 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] YU Xiao-fei, WU Wen-yu, ZHANG Dong-sheng, et al. China Forest Products Industry. Vol. 37(2010), p.57.

Google Scholar

[2] LIU Xin-bo. Forestry Science and Technology Information. Vol. 39(2007), p.18.

Google Scholar

[3] LI Wen-jie, LIU Zi-quan, HE Ya-bing. Forestry of China. Vol. 12B(2010), p.61.

Google Scholar

[4] Chen Li-li, Chen Bin, Liu Xing-feng, et al. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research. Vol. 5(2013), p.380.

Google Scholar

[5] Chen Li-li, Chen Bin, Liu Xing-feng, et al. Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology. Vol. 33(2013), p.27.

Google Scholar

[6] LI Shao-peng, LIN De-zhi, CHEN Bao-yu, et al. Ecological Science. Vol. 29(2010), p.411.

Google Scholar

[7] XIN Guo-rong, LI Jian, YANG Zhong-yi. ACTA PRATACULTURAE SINICA. Vol. 20(2011), p.118.

Google Scholar

[8] XIN Guo-rong, YANG Zhong-yi, XU Ya-xing, et al. ACTA PRATACULTURAE SINICA. Vol. 9(2000), p.17.

Google Scholar

[9] YANG Zhong-yi, Xin Guo-rong, Yue Chao-yang. PRATACULTURAL SCINENCE. Vol. 14(1997), p.35.

Google Scholar

[10] Van Ranst G, Vandewalle M, Gadeyne F, et al. Animal. Vol. 7(2013), p.1454.

Google Scholar

[11] Njaståd KM, Adler SA, Hansen-MØller J, et al. J Dairy Sci. Published Online: October 08, (2014).

Google Scholar

[12] WANG Yu-tao, XIN Guo-rong, CHEN San-you, et al. PRATACULTURAL SCIENCE. Vol. 25(2008), p.118.

Google Scholar

[13] ZHANG Xin-yue, LI Yuan-hua, YE Zhi-song. ACTA PRATACULTURAE SINICA. Vol. 10(2001), p.72.

Google Scholar

[14] ZHANG Jian-xin. SHANXI JOURANL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES. Vol. 1(2000), p.17.

Google Scholar

[15] John J, Frederick G, Pefter S, et al. JAMA. Vol. 283(2002), p.1016.

Google Scholar

[16] Kramer M, Bongaerts J, Bovenberg R, et al. MetabEng. Vol. 5(2003), p.277.

Google Scholar

[17] Cui YY, Ling C, Zhang YY, et al. Microb Cell Fact. 2014 Feb 10, p.13.

Google Scholar

[18] Kim CU, Lew W, Williams MA, et al. J Am Chem Soc. Vol. 119(1997), p.681.

Google Scholar

[19] Ghosh S, Chisti Y, Banerjee Uttam C. Biotechnol Adv. Vol. 30(2012), p.1425.

Google Scholar

[20] WANG Dong-ming, YING Jun-hui, FU Bing. ZHEJIANG JOURANL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES. Vol. 5(2011), p.1112.

Google Scholar

[21] ZENG Hui, LI Kai-xiang, LU Shun-zhong. Guangxi Forestry Science. Vol. 37(2008), p.223.

Google Scholar