Discussion on session 3

Animal Feed Science and Technology, 1 (1976) 327-343 Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam Printed in The Netherlands

DISCUSSION

E.

ON

two papers

effects

on the

that means

-

the p a p e r s ear

corn

stage

both

aeration

means

Then

during

the

also

and

changes

former

which

figure.

discuss

will

So,

first,

ears

or h i g h m o i s t u r e

J.B.

Kilkenny

I ask Firstly,

for

other

size

and

aeration

to e s t i m a t e

losses

the

changes and c h a n g e s

avoidable

or e v e n

general

triple

line,

the

the

or e a r s

storage

and

are a b l e

second

losses the

we may

conservation

like

some

summer

on the h e a t i n g

comment losses

on the

in Dr.

of

chemistry

should

to

paper

heating. of t h a t

on w h a t

farmers

farmers

in p a r t i c u l a r ,

process.

Zimmer's

through

recommendations

be r e c o m m e n d i n g

how quickly

in the

in the

reducing

information

should

words,

silage,

plant

the

treatment

this and

information

of u r e a

I would

we

follow

in

are m a i n l y

particle

during

double

content

done

grain.

further

like m o r e

feeding

affects

biological

sometimes

I am interested

Secondly,

factors

showed,

the

for h i g h m o i s t u r e

or the u n a v o i d a b l e

also

crop maize

in e n e r g y

This was

of the m a i z e

that we

showed

of f e r m e n t a t i o n

UK

on the e f f e c t would

paper

if w e

whole

and

Physical

the m i n i m u m

second

reduction

procedure,

From

type

value.

These

losses,

to d i s c u s s

, the

silage

treatment

unloading.

unavoidable

as t h e

and

grain.

filling

fermentation,

and

losses

or the D M c o n t e n t

technology.

call

going

first

in n u t r i t i v e

physical

during

silage

on,

for w h o l e - c r o p

or d u r i n g

what we

of

change

or h i g h m o i s t u r e

or g r a i n .

are n o w

factors

amount

the

of m a t u r i t y

period

that we

of t h e m a i n

and then

3

West Germany

Zimmer

The

SESSION

327

for

rate

of

silage.

be u t i l i s i n g

to r e d u c e

I

reaction.

these

In

maize problems

of h e a t i n g ?

E.

Zimmer

Firstly, not

heating

fermentation

but

or s o - c a l l e d a complete

'after-fermentation'.

mineralisation

of o r g a n i c

It is acids

328

and

therefore

there

is

and

following

that,

other

our

knowledge

up

However,

in t h e

to now, last

Dn Woolford

from

Dr. H O n i g ,

involved

in the

goes

in t h i s

more

with

Hurley

days, who

the

heating

The

only

by

stating

lactic

type

of

fermentation

that

acetic

fungicidal more the

into

Institute Now

the

that

as w e l l

effect.

deeply

as

right

size

of

silo

the

right

size

of

trench

must

ensure

covering

quick

of

the

fermentation are

the

acid,

H.

recipes

this

I would effect

when as

like

ammonia

indicates

time

at

cannot

that

the

the

the

for

data

to d e a l we

are

six also

which

a little

can

explain

gives

a more

hetero-

more

acetic

acid.

and

butyric we

noted

has

did

up

We

a

not

look

in e x p e r i m e n t s

in

is, of

right good

give,

or

of

packing at

heating

of

animals

size

aeration of

first

can

to h a v e

the

group;

Then

very

of

storage. add

they

quick

beginning

after

they

in

tower. and

the

all,

These

some

organic

cost.

we

was

specific

beginning The silage for

Urea

as h i g h out

some

ammonia

responsible

silo

anew. be

found

on

silo:

of e n s i l i n g .

develop

we

or

the

ammonia-treated opening

some

urea

means

number

very

can

additive

micro-organisms active

with

Institute

explanation;

the

risk

to m a k e

of u r e a

unloading

an

we

responsible.

bacteria

need

farmers

the

or

because

depends

less

From

West Germany

H~nig

the

to

for

the

acids,

discussion

have

of

It w a s

in

in F r a n c e .

filling,

silo

causes

old

but

is o u r

or

our

often

which

recommendation

the

we

effect

details.

as w e l l

at

and we

urea

decrease

decomposition.

whether

as p r o p i o n i c

This

the

studied

question

to n o w

know

of

finished

However,

problem.

in pH,

are m o r e we

process

direction.

this

increase processes yeasts

few

months

with

an

from

as

of

these

the

found

that

the

than

that

of

ammonia

effect for the

aerobic

effect

lactic

results.

process

or

ammonia

additive.

For

Prosil and

against

four

the

and

this

those is

at

the

proceeds days

micro-organisms to

ammonia

of

urea

fermentation three

responsible

transformed

of

of

decomposition

deterioration

fermentation

takes

it

chemistry

aerobic

better

but

a pure

to

in p r e v e n t i n g

normal

the is

additions

so

That

prevention

in

after

to its

effect

is w h a t of

aerobic

329

decomposition

when

out o n c e m o r e

the v e r y

We m a d e

comparisons

of the m a t e r i a l blocks

or

a marked in the after

unloading

scraping

three

silo

after days

to u s e

blocks

c u t by b l o c k - c u t t i n g

of the

cattle-shed

we put

the

This

R.J.

Wilkins

I would statement We,

like

our

means

feeling

in s u c h

a way

We have

done

we

some

limited

that

findings you

effect

silo,

In f u r t h e r

would

of at

feeding

area

these

up after

3 days.

is v e r y ,

very

term

be v e r y

in s o m e

an a d d i t i o n So the

lower

compared

with

experiments

the

to t h o s e

in a e r o b i c

propionic

acid

increase a day was

propionic are

or

less acid

in the

same

in B r a u n s c h w e i g

total

material

with

did

of

found

the e f f e c t

we had and

we

by perhaps

of 0 . 2 5 %

in M i c h i g a n the

acid,

but

results

feeding

to air.

on the e f f e c t s

delayed

silage

situations

silage

of the m a s s

propionic

up w a s

studies

feeding and

In one e x p e r i m e n t

with

similar

deterioration.

of d e t e r i o r a t i o n

in m o s t

the e x p o s u r e

Prosil-treated

stability

least 0.5%

involved process

is t h a t

with

in his

aerobic

experimentation

obtained

of the

of the

a long

rates

with

strongly

of the e n s i l i n g

of u n t r e a t e d

basis.

this

been

of t h i s

additives.

Heating

obtained

associated

out

have

in c o m p a r i s o n

as t h o s e

additives.

Dr. H ~ n i g

at the m o m e n t

micro-organisms taken

for the that when

deterioration.

of p r e v e n t i n g

of m a n a g e m e n t

on a f r e s h m a t t e r direction

case

Beside

compactness

as to m i n i m i s e

than

than we had

was

in the

the

Zimmer,

stability.

two more

put

for 7 days.

keeping

aerobic

time

finding

it h e a t e d

of c o n t r o l

nitrogen

Prosil,

aerobic

were

stable

in the o t h e r

is e n o u g h

Another

device

to s u p p o r t

Professor

it is a m a t t e r

that

and

and

that

and we had

UK

like

non-protein

day

out

exact

It s t a r t e d

loosened

on the k e y w a y s

of c h e m i c a l but

hint

to p r e v e n t

the u n l o a d e r ,

and t h a t

silage.

tearing

cutting

deterioration.

second

they were

same material

is a n o t h e r

important

stable

and

to p o i n t technology.

s i l o by r a p i d

face w i t h

only,

farmer

want

or b a d

unloader,

aerobic

the

I would

of g o o d

the

front-end

in the

four the

the

the

case, or

silo,

effect

of u n l o a d i n g

with

difference

first

the

great

silage

viable when made

propionic

of

it w a s without

acid

in G e r m a n y .

conditions

count

and

, our

To g i v e

application

on a D M b a s i s

are n e e d e d .

330

This would

give

you

it is an e x p e n s i v e but

our

observations

increase This

E.

in a e r o b i c

is o n l y

would

not

stability

a very

I was

nitrogen

has

fermentation effect

limited

pointing

another and

against

if t h e y effect

in f e e d i n g

out but

urea we have no experiments

support

the

finding

in u r e a - t r e a t e d

of an

maize

silage.

observation.

add N P N

recommend

using

R.L.

comments

Vetter

I have

one

allows

propionic

acid

comment

than

any other

very well

is,

add

are y o u

saying

is r e d u c i n g

if y o u

are n o t

lactic

acid

you have

standpoint

to f a r m e r s this

of

So w e

said, of

cannot

Do we have

or o t h e r

that

stabilising

or e v e n 0 . 7 %

at p r e s e n t . problem

lactic

as h a v i n g

your

lactic

paper acid

acid has

any

questions?

then

is the there

of a g r e a t e r

getting a higher loss,

to or g r e a t e r

amount

a procedure

you have

you

effect

you

which My

are

I wonder If y o u

efficiency,

efficiency

than when

When

which

which

acids,

I

energetic

of acids.

production?

energetic

the n e t

phase

is a b u f f e r i n g

total

are

components.

initial

total

of a c i d more

- you

fermentation.

a higher

of the d r y m a t t e r

there

the a m o u n t

DM

of

recommending

really

a slight

be e q u a l

that

or P r o s i l ,

the p r o d u c t i o n

question

0.5%

to add

stabilising

as Dr. W i l k i n s

economic.

arising from

the h i g h p e n a l t i e s

add u r e a

explained

adding

heating

this

in a d d i t i o n , we know,

is n o t

from our work

efficiency

have,

conditions,

f r o m the

into

can recommend

or a c e t i c

on t h i s

effect

looked

because

as an a d d i t i v e

USA

discounting believe

we

So, w e

they will

German acid

is t h a t N P N

interesting

therefore

heating

propionic

other

out

heating.

against

also under

may

flexibility With

Zimmer

What

you

tremendous procedure.

to the less

look

even

animal

lactic

acid

production.

E.

Zimmer

We did not

look

at this

hi~her

energy

efficiency;

at

though

we know

331

by

using

we

get

urea,

higher

an e n e r g y points sugar So,

on to

we

stated

We

did

not

If y o u

calculate

increase,

let m e

say,

acid

early we

this

Professor

find

that

as

energy

the

method

conditions,

to

the

we

know

the

is

the

effect

will

can

an

on

on

4

converting our

methods.

buffering

from

effect

and

have

give

of

increase

people

but

experiments

this 2 or

loss

range

this

difference Kaufmann

agree any

lactic

Ohio

of u s i n g

NPN

fermentation.

I am not

an e f f e c t answer.

sure

on

It

the

animals

is o n l y

4%.

with

Zimmer;

difference

I would

in e n e r g y

not

believe

efficiency

that

with

you

a little

acid.

Zimmer

I think compared change any

to

Professor

the

4%

- we

whole

go

net

energy

composition

did

of

data

in t h e

from

iO - 14% content;

or it

carbohydrates.

from

middle

the

States

1950s.

8 - 12%.

This

is a v e r y

small

I have going

Can

you

not

the

give

way new

is

found the data

Vetter?

Vetter

Dr. O w e n s although the

but

is

experimental

people

R.L.

it

in t h e

new

Ohio

of

a certain

a 3.5%

of

West Germany

I would

E.

is w i t h i n

feeding

small

Kaufmann

more

with

it

195Os,

say

into

- maybe

would

compared means

German

whether

W.

therefore

content.

recommend

go

and

acid

under

in t h e

increased

this

a DM basis

therefore

is

basis

lactic

do not

capacity

lactic

loss

capacity,

and

buffering

from

I do

not

conversion

that

loss

M¢lle

A

few

recently

know

data

of

versus

methanogenesis

K.G.

Oklahoma

so

the

organic the

that

matter

loss

you

are

reported

in d e t a i l .

in t h e

in t h e rumen

absorbing

on n e t We

are

efficiency talking

fermentation where

you

of

here silage

have

lactate.

Denmark years

ago

some

firms

advised

that

if y o u

were

unlucky

332

and

the

silage

was

heating

during

it w i t h ,

for

instance,

propionic

aware

the

heating.

Now,

of

find

it

done

during

is n o t apply

stated

acid

E.

Zimmer

if

a certain

This

think

was

up

a wrong

five

them.

It

is

2 cm,

for

the

then

in o t h e r

that

you

words,

silo

is o u r

tower

You

that

can

it

to some

so?

answer,

because

population,

penetrate

or

I

to be

because

to do

bacterial

cannot

trench

has

is h e a t i n g ,

heating

that

even

were

Zimmer,

heating

a possibility

or

you

Professor

silage

impossible.

difference

the

expect of

in

loss

between

the

Figure

in

starch of

the

but

silage

was

enough

silo

to k i l l

penetrate

Professor

maybe

equivalent

and

extent

of

as

material

or

as

of

of

get

because

to d e c r e a s e .

aerobic

the

to w h y

should

increases,

fermentation

I can

parts

puzzled

content

respiration

Now

a result

digestible

fresh

between

content.

I am a b i t

as D M

Zimmer,

equivalent

to D M

most

terms,

increased

3,

starch

in r e l a t i o n

content,

in a b s o l u t e

would

to y o u r

decrease

and

difference

Is

deterioration,

factor?

Zimmer

No, model Like

both

I would

I had you,

could

So,

ago your

maize

starch

it b e c a u s e

E.

the

the

fermentation

or w h a t

is

recommendation,

refers

fresh

understand

one

arrest

there

moment

treat

UK

show

and

greater,

to

mean, if h i s

could

example.

you

plant,

try

technically

question

silage

the

into

Wilkinson

where

that

population,

months

acid

My

to

the

paper

you

to p r e v e n t

a farmer

that

yeast

propionic

J.M.

Does

for

in o r d e r

still

acid

in y o u r

application

filling.

worthwhile

people

built

that

unloading

not the

these

say

to u s e

I was find data data

that

astonished another

coming will

it

to b r i n g

is b e c a u s e together by

this

correlation

from give

fresh only

of

all

smaller and

mathematical available

difference

regression

material

the

the the

general

and

other

tendency

data. but

formula

I for

material. here

and

you

333 cannot 22.5

take

them and say that

starch

content

equivalent

it is exactly

do not have the w h o l e

difference, the

sufficient

period

for 20% DM content,

same;

and going

experiments

comparing

of stages

it is

to another

it is general

of DM content,

then

DM

tendency. those

We

things

over

of maturity.

W. K a u f m a n n

There m i g h t starch

and other

in starch

equivalents

because crude

be a d i f f e r e n c e

equivalents

between

the c a l c u l a t i o n

calculations there

of energy

of

content,

is a c a l c u l a t i o n

from the

fibre.

E. Zimmer

However,

this

Dr. W i l k i n s o n

C. Lelong

has

account

for this

difference

that

on the effect

of

France

I would propionic

agree w i t h your

acid

during

We try to avoid we apply

cannot stated.

formation

a little

find the yeast

conclusions

summer when you cut a slice of yeast

propionic

is d e c r e a s e d

acid

under

the p l a s t i c

on the surface

to a depth

of silage. cover

there

and

and we

of i0 or 15 cm.

E. Zimmer

This Dr. HOnig prevent

picture,

and D ~ Wilkins

quick

layers

filling of your

Then you have

question

a special

was

related

means

acid here

There we w o u l d

to adding

had already

layers

agree,

propionic

started

in the

it by its own

by the higher last

layer

of the

then you get an However,

acid during

and at this

will

high

and therefore

risk to the

add some p r o p i o n i c

precaution.

heating

aeration

of the deeper

and

good m a n a g e m e n t

silo also you can prevent

layers.

silo and if you

I stated,

Good m a n a g e m e n t

to avoid

by the c o v e r i n g

additional

As

agreed with me,

density,

when

of course.

the risk of heating.

density, deeper

is another

stage

the

unloading

it is

334 impossible

to d o

it.

C. L e l o n g

I have You had

another

a very

conclusion

is t h a t

55 - 60% D M b u t cribs

and

to g e t

E.

it is n e c e s s a r y

I said very

good

on e a r

I agree with

you

to e n s i l e

it is p o s s i b l e

that minimum

conservation.

and

our

ears with to p u t

water

only

cobs

content

in

is

fermentation.

Italy

R. P a r i ~ i - B i n i

declines

to P a r i g i - B i n i ,

at 75% of D M

it is w e l l - k n o w n

necessary

No,

questio~

low D M c o n t e n t .

that when

the D M g o e s

higher

than

65%,

fermentation

rapidly.

Zimmer

This kind

is a g e n e r a l

of c r o p s

we have

our micro-organisms of

course,

we

increase

lactic

closely

correlated. with

that with

increasing

to ensile, w e d e c r e a s e

and

proportion

develops

tendency

stabilise

acid pH,

to v o l a t i l e

but

fatty

inevitable

DM content,

activity in t e r m s

acids.

pH and d r y m a t t e r

It is n o t

a higher

the

fermentation

D M in a n y of of the

Then,

content

that more

of

are

yeast

if the m a n a g e m e n t

is good.

C. L e l o n g

The

production

of e a r

silage

is v e r y

difficult

beyond

65% DM.

R. P a r i g i - B i n i

However, Italy,

in s e v e r a l

we have

The dry matter entire

plant

been

of o u r

per day

we h a v e

sun and

in j u s t

t w o or t h r e e

'when n o t

years,

obliged crop

in some w e a t h e r

to c o l l e c t is g o i n g

ears

up, m o r e

in the p a r t i c u l a r

than

weather

a l s o wind, and t h e d r y m a t t e r

imposed

days.

This

by climatic

is w h y

than

in 70% DM.

1% in the

conditions, goes very

in m y

conditions'

conditions

at m o r e

conclusion

In the

real

when

high I say, conditions

335

of the

farm you

In a f e w d a y s , goes

E.

up very

do not have in o u r

time

to c o l l e c t

conditions

in Italy,

more

quickly.

the DM

in the

crop

rapidly.

Zimmer

This May

question

I ask you

there

are

f r o m Mr.

to f i n i s h

any o t h e r

changed

the d i s c u s s i o n

to the

on the

second

first

paper.

paper

if

questions.

Italy

D. L a n a r i

I would

like

to ask y o u

relating

to y o u r T a b l e

Maize'

I am interested

percentage ibility

Lelong

3,

a question,

'Effect in the

of D M in f a e c e s .

or j u s t m e a s u r e

by washing

faeces

and

Professor

of C h o p p i n g

figures

you report

Did you measure

the

amount

looking

Zimmer,

Treatment

the o v e r a l l

of D M t h a t y o u

at the g r a i n

on

of the digest-

collected

content?

H. H ~ n i g

Grain

losses

freeze-dry calculate

in the

a sample the

of

amount

faeces faeces,

to t h e d r y m a t t e r

addition

we have

from

faeces

same value The grain and

D.

found

as the g r a i n s

relationship

not digested

only

with

analysed and

10%

weight

was

that going

about

content

you

run d i g e s t i o n

in the

into

20%

of

we

and

in

feed.

of the g r a i n s practically

In

sorted of the

the rumen. grain

for h i g h

eaten

and

dry matter

at an e a r l i e r

25 - 30%.

trials?

the g r a i n s

of g r a i n

the w h o l e

harvested

out

follows:

of g r a i n s

they were

Lanari

Did

sort

as

weight

the m a t e r i a l

between

for m a t e r i a l

a dry matter

then

of d r y m a t t e r

relation

the

are d e t e r m i n e d

the

maize

stage

out

336 H.

H~nig

We

D.

did

not.

Lanari

I am thinking difference which

E°

is r e c u t

of

Because,

which

digestion

probably,

do n o t

find

such

between

is n o t

recut

after

of

kernels?

a big

maize

silage

unloading.

the

and Now,

I am curious

which

with

are

you

Silage

the

same

after

kind

of

losses,

there

unloading.

which

say

to k n o w

or

detail

You

mention

less

how many

in t h i s

with use'

statement

that,

in G e r m a n y ,

urea

ha

it

this

is

in

of y o u r

because

comparable,

is m a d e

of y o u r

with

'Maisfertil'

'in c o m m o n

is m a d e

one

of m i n e r a l s

this

more

silage

When

on

additives.

combination

are m a d e

all

a question

on N P N

the

t h e r e is

in r e c u t t i n g

Netherlands

de B o e r

paper

common

maize

in o u r

is o n l y

mean

iO,

urea use.

silage

conditions about

urea/mineral

do y o u

in y o u r

1% of

mixture.

20,

30%

of

your

way?

Zimmer

No, used, is

some

advantage

I have

E.

that

you

digestibility

Lanari

is n o

F.

and

probably matter

Zimmer

Because

D.

that

in o r g a n i c

not

but

know

big

I cannot

a fairly

they

such

new

the

a percentage

amounts.

give

a figure

product.

advantages of

the

Common

total

All and

the

for

use

means

'Maisfertil'

farmers

know

disadvantages

but

acreage.

well-known because

it v e r y I cannot

and it

well, give

337

D.

Netherlands

Oostendorp

Can you products

say

are

a little

added

more

to the

about

silage?

the w a y What

in w h i c h

type

these

of a p p l i c a t o r s

are u s e d ?

E.

Zimmer

There

are

applicators

silage

additives

during

the

do not under

mounted

chopping

have

a really

of

are u s e d

on t h e

forage

the m a t e r i a l .

good method

experimentation

'Maisfertil'

which

and

it is n o t

for a d d i n g

chopper. For

the

It is a p p l i e d

liquid

of a p p l i c a t i o n .

is a r e a l

a technical

problem. problem,

other

Prosil

we

This

is s t i l l

However,

for u r e a

you

can b u y

the

machine.

H.

the

I would

like

faeces.

Has

existing dairy and much

W.

between

cattle?

sheep

and

found

to the q u e s t i o n

more

information

cattle

in the

higher

than

in b e e f

silage

of g r a i n

of the g r a i n

in

of d i f f e r e n c e s

or b e t w e e n

same

the p e r c e n t a g e

beef

given

in c o w

cattle to b e e f

and cattle

faeces wag

cattle.

Kaufmann

answer

there but

are p r o b a b l y

it is p r o b a b l y

Normally

beef

cattle

some

papers

related have

where

you

to the h i g h e r

a lower

can g e t rate

of

intake.

Zimmer

Even different

W.

somebody

that

intake.

E.

We

to c o m e b a c k

to cows

I think the

Switzerland

Schneeberger

if y o u b a s e

your

relationship

data

on the

for s h e e p

and

same

intake

you have

a

for c a t t l e ?

Kaufmann

That

is q u i t e

another

question,

yes.

It is a b o u t

4%,

3%

or

338

difference

R.J.

is

of

the

the

to w o r k

in D M

In

and

and

been some

for

and

where

freezing

you

of

we

composition

two

has

been

and

we

cuts in

at

but

made

have

and we

have

on

you

got

have

a crop

material

your

that

recovered

have

maize

perhaps have

the

frosted during

The

agent

experiments sheep

different before

later

rather

frost

material less in

comments,

are m o r e

intake

or o t h e r

certainly,

to be

stages

any major

that

liable

harvesting

likely

.

critically

differences

agree, you

an

feeding

cut

further

the

are

in

found

major

your

as

feeding

had

it

freezing

I am not

after

silo.

content

found

DM yields

frost

one

after occur

In B r i t a i n , after

looked

not

on

attention

losses

value.

welcomed

discussed

effects

drawn

the m a t e r i a l .

I would

is

physically

been

conditions

weeks

animal

like

this.

dry

involved

DM

not

comments,

and

both

in

not

have

in t w o

we

higher

people's

if

to be

operation

and

reduced.

Zimmer

the

There

is v e r y

paper

you

little

will

find

do n o t

have

experiments

but

feel

that

we

more

precisely

into

the

poor

fermentation,

you

sheep.

substantial

that

had

fermentation

I would

losing

in

from

afterwards,

a rather

fermentation,

DM

has

you

material

myself,

or d i g e s t i b i l i t y .

E.

in

subsequant

nutritive

in E n g l a n d

undertaken

which

humid

perhaps

the

its

that

or

have

somewhat

on

differences harvested

both

to e n s i l e

experiments

I have

then

had

that

and

in t h a t

a conclusion

common

of d e v e l o p m e n t ,

that

lower

paper

quality

have

situations

silage

and

cattle,

freezing

in d i g e s t i b i l i t y very

at e f f e c t s that

and

in y o u r

of

silage

draw

increasing

aware

on

points

question

composition

has

sheep

Wilkins

One yet

between

have

harvesting

farm

only

we

at

only of

have

the

own

to do

it

it

which

three

our

things

situation

good

information

going

seems

late

or

this.

four

in t h e on.

to us

with

this

near

that

is

We

to

look

looking amount

because

found

in

question

from

a higher

for m a i z e

after

look

future

However,

quality,

in a u t u m n ,

If y o u

publications.

dealing

is u n c o m m o n

fermentation

the maize

on

of

normally

after

freezing.

There

are

339

a few observations that

there

that

are m o r e

So this, t o g e t h e r , but nobody more

because,

C.

epiphytic

We have

to

parts

more

and

at t h e s e

change

coli,

of a c e r t a i n

answer

look

flora will

bacteria,

a picture

a certain

in the n o r t h e r n

degree

I could

not

particular

of E u r o p e ,

they

so

and

so on.

of r i s k find

conditions,

are n o r m a l .

Lelong

Andrieu plants

and

is a b o u t average

frosted

information

plants.

was

it w a s

In n o r m a l

stage.

5.9 - 6% of

only

on the

sugar

plants

Three weeks sugar.

2% of sugar.

content the

of n o r m a l

sugar

content

after

frost

Five weeks

after

This will

the

b e an e x p l a n a t i o n

prediction.

Phipps

UK

We have after

some

content

of y o u r

R.H.

has

18% at the m i l k

freezing

also noted

freezing

markedly

and

crop would

that

(I a s s u m e

the m i n e r a l

you mean

alsq obviously,

be d e c r e a s e d

ation

indicating

after

frosting.

E.

gives

can g i v e

details.

the

proteolytic

a hard

frost)

the vitamin

considerably.

a decrease

composition has

A content

We have

crop

decreased of the

got

in the d i g e s t i b i l i t y

of the

some

of the

informcrop

Zimmer

We must ensiling aspect

now discuss

has

already

or c o m m e n t s ? 1973,

we

the

of h i g h m o i s t u r e

are

the g e n e r a l

From

been our

in t o t a l tendency

second

ears

discussed. own

Are

dealing

there

experiments,

agreement of

paper,

and h i g h m o i s t u r e

with

increasing

with

One

any q u e s t i o n s

reported

in P a r i s

Parigi-Bini's

D M and all

the

grain.

in

findings,

the o t h e r

aspects

R. P a r i g i - B i n i

After a recent

sending number

of an O k l a h o m a

of

in the p a p e r the J o u r n a l

State

University

for t h i s

Conference,

of A n i m a l worker

Science,

which

was

I read

the p a p e r quite

in

34O

interesting. moisture corn,

It w a s

corn.

ground and

grain

more

E.

was

cells

more

C.

measured

entire

the

the

fermentation

kernels,

degradation

intensive

in

physical

and

ground

of

in the

found

that

of n i t r o g e n the

form

high

high

components

form

moisture

fermentation

than

of

was

the

in k e r n e l s .

Zimmer

I think of

They

or

increased

concerning

this

will

fits

into

increase

substrate

the

the

general

microbial

immediately

picture

activity

that

disintegration

because

there

is

available.

Lelong

In F r a n c e farms

which

about

8%;

we

have

seen

are, for w h o l e

and

for

grain,

dry

matter

plant high

losses

silage,

moisture

15%; and

in b i g for

silos

ear

ground

on

silage

grain,

about

4 - 5%.

R.

Parigi-Bini

What

C.

the

below the

is

55

this

silo

during

- 80%,

moisture

during

summer

content

and

of y o u r

for

content

summer

when

ear

silage?

grain, it

because

there

is

about

is q u i t e

30 - 35% impossible

fermentation

a low

because

content

to m a n a g e

increases

quickly

of w a t e r .

Parigi-Bini

Concerning losses

must

technique high

DM

good

crop

because the

DM

Lelong

It

R.

is

ensiling

be m a d e

is n o t

content silage

there

losses.

losses

in b i g

so e x a c t because or

is m o r e

silos.

can

with

with

have very

fermentation

the

best

I think

especially

you

also

I think

the

high

buried

a product

a good

and

measure

idea

moisture

also

you

the

bag

having

with corn can

of

a

a or

ears

measure

341

B.G.

Belgium

Cottyn

May I ask

D~ Parigi-Bini

for some m o r e d e t a i l s

t e c h n i q u e of b u r i e d bags to d e t e r m i n e

about the

the p e r c e n t a g e

losses?

R. P a r i g i - B i n i

It is just a d i g e s t i b i l i t y a w e i g h e d q u a n t i t y of m a t e r i a l seal

trial

inside the silo.

You put

in a p l a s t i c bag but you do not

it.

E. Zimmer

In a net.

R. P a r i g i - B i n i

You put several kg of fresh m a t e r i a l w h e n you m a k e the silo and w h e n you open the

B.G.

silo you take the bag out.

Cottyn

Have you m a d e weighing

c o m p a r i s o n s w i t h the c l a s s i c a l

in and out to d e t e r m i n e

t e c h n i q u e of

losses?

R. P a r i g i - B i n i

No.

I measure

losses

just by the b u r i e d bag technique;

have no p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e

of c o m p a r i s o n s

my o p i n i o n w h e n using m a t e r i a l s to w e i g h

I

of the two but in

of h i g h DM c o n t e n t

it is b e t t e r

the w h o l e quantity.

E. Zimmer

If you w a n t to look in m o r e d e t a i l a particular

very good one. bag m e t h o d

at the c o n d i t i o n s of

r e g i o n of the silo this b u r i e d bag m e t h o d

there

If you have e n o u g h

is a

samples w i t h the b u r i e d

should not be a d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the total

input/output balance

and the b u r i e d bag i n p u t / o u t p u t balance.

342

R.L.

Vetter

I should USA much and

try

of o u r

in l o o k i n g

to c l a r i f y

high moisture at t h a t

bunker

silo

favour

consistently,

form and maize

(which

then

one,

fermentation. a consistent provided

the g r a i n range

in the

initial

of

prior

22 - 30%

advantage

structure

or r e c o n s t i t u t i n g

grain

in the w h o l e

and then

should very

C.

be d i s t i n g u i s h e d

consistent

here

that

grain.

structure by rolling high moisture

particularly,

there

to a h i g h m o i s t u r e

level

before

because

type

With

show

feeding.

the d a t a

This

in the U S A

aspect are

of p r o c e s s i n g .

Lelong

What

R.

with

rolling

preceding

trials

is n e c e s s a r y ,

like m i l o ,

by reconstituting

is

as w h o l e

a good

it is e n s i l e d .

grain

but with

the p r o c e s s

f r o m the

silos or

the d a t a

of g e r m i n a t i o n

silo with

is an i m p r o v e m e n t

trench

in w h o l e

to s t o r a g e

compaction

before

the

to f e e d i n g

phases,

In the

into vertical

versus

storage

of the d a t a p o o l e d

the g r a i n

work,

are u s i n g more)

it is in an u p r i g h t

form

is p u t

trials,

in the

Most

In a h o r i z o n t a l

grain

grain

of s t o r a g e

in m a n y

performance

that

or c r u s h i n g

type

of the O k l a h o m a

I am sure you

rolling

moisture

basically

some

is the e f f e c t

of c o n s e r v a t i o n

time

on

losses?

Parigi-Bini

These

experiments

have

been

conducted

in a f i x e d

time.

C. L e l o n g

I thought

E.

whole

plant

silage

gave

this

information.

Zimmer

From measuring that

if we h a v e

If w e h a v e

some

CO 2 production

stable leakage

conditions, we have

over

a long p e r i o d

CO 2 production

an i n c r e a s e ,

we know

is n e a r

and u n d e r

sub-

zero

343

optimal and

this

to us

conditions, is

then

a general

or

1% D M rule

farm or

for

conditions,

even all

2% D M

the

we

per

crops

we

have

month. have.

an

increase

This

seems