Corn Silage Inoculants

Review
Gbola Adesogan

Department of Animal Sciences
IFAS, University of Florida
Outline
Silage fermentation process
Chemical additives
Organic acid additives
Ammonia (urea)
Inoculants
Definition
Roles
Types
Effectiveness
Take home messages

Chemical changes during
fermentation
1. Anaerobic bacteria ferment sugars to volatile acids
e.g. lactic, acetic & butyric acids
2. Acids pickle the forage and inhibit undesirable microbes
3. Protein is partially degraded into ammonia
4. These processes can cause DM losses (effluent / seepage)
Sugars
Chemical changes during
fermentation
Pickling / fermentation of the forage



Days
21
CP
Lactate
Ammonia
Acetic acid
Butyric acid
20
15
10
5
Scale (%)
1
pH
CROP SILAGE
Fermentation pathways
Product Nutrient
Losses
Substrate
(Microbe)
Fermentation
2 x Lactic acid
(Low pH)
Low Glucose
(L. plantarum)
Homo-
fermentative
1 x Lactic & acetic
acids, ethanol &
CO
2
(Moderate pH)
Moderate Glucose
(L. buchneri)
Hetero-
fermentative
V. high Ethanol, CO
2
Glucose, lactic
acid (Yeasts &
molds)
Aerobic
spoilage
Butyric acid + CO
2
(High pH)
High Lactic acid
(Clostridia)
Secondary
fermentation
Organic acids
Role
Rapidly reduce pH; hence inhibit undesirable microbes
Antifungal hence enhance aerobic stability

Types
Pure acids e.g. formic, propionic, acetic & benzoic acids.
Effective but caustic & hazardous
Buffered organic acids Ca & Na salts of pure acids
Less caustic & safer to handle

Ammonia (urea)
Role
Alkaline and antifungal in nature
Improves aerobic stability
Contributes CP
Concerns
Narrow harvest window
If < 60% moisture volatilization
If >70% moisture N loss in effluent
May hinder fermentation & increase DM losses
V. caustic, protective clothing required
Ammonia poisoning
Inoculants
Definition
Additives containing bacteria selected to grow quickly and
dominate the bacterial population in the silage

Types
1. Traditional (homofermentative) inoculants
e.g. Lactobacillus plantarum
lactic acid & pH, acetic & butyric acids
losses of DM (1-3%), sugar and protein
May increase fiber digestion & animal
performance (3-5%)

2. Newer inoculants (heterofermentative)
Aerobic stability enhancers
e.g. L. buchneri
Effectiveness of inoculants
0
20
40
60
(Muck & Kung, 1997)
n = 221 233 148
34
39
82
35
Effectiveness of inoculants in
different silages
Fermentation 60%
Intake 28%
Gain 53%
Milk
production
47%
(Muck, 2002)
Effectiveness of inoculants in
different silages
%

t
r
i
a
l
s

w
i
t
h

l
o
w
e
r

p
H

0
20
40
60
Alfalfa Grass Corn Sm. Grain
(Muck and Kung, 1997)
Epiphytic bacteria on Standing Crops

0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
C
o
r
n
P
.

R
y
e
g
r
a
s
s
R
y
e
g
r
a
s
s
H
.

R
y
e
g
r
a
s
s
A
l
f
a
l
f
a
Homoferm. Heteroferm. Entero
(Andrieu & Gouet, 1990)
Contrasting views on inoculants
Results from over 200 laboratory-scale silo studies,
indicated bacterial inoculants were beneficial in over
90% of the trials. A good-quality, effective inoculant
should be applied to every load of forage ensiled!
(Bolsen, 1997)

Reviewed corn silage inoculants articles for 5 years
We dont see enough benefits to recommend
inoculants for corn silage (Muck, 2001)


Forage factors affecting inoculant
action
Forage epiphytic microbial population
Forage sugar content
Forage buffering capacity
Forage maturity stage
Forage hybrid / variety
Inoculant factors affecting
inoculant action
Bacteria strain and composition
Bacteria viability
Inoculant application rate
> 100,000 live bacteria (cfu)/g or > 90 billion bacteria /
ton
Inoculant form
Liquid inoculants act faster & more evenly distributed
Must use within 24h & inactivated by chlorinated water
All inoculants are not created equal
Fermentation enhancement when epiphytic bacteria are
compromised -
Immediately after frost
Dry crop
Immature crop
Use traditional homofermentative inoculants

Aerobic stability enhancement
Homofermentative inoculants reduce acetate and
propionate, hence are less effective
Use L. buchneri (heterofermentative)

Inoculants are most effective for
corn silage for:
QUESTION:
Does anyone know if I can re-bag corn silage? We need more
pavement and the bag is in the way. Would it work better to put it
in a bunker silo?
ANSWERS
1. No problemo re-bagging. Would very much
recommend it.

1. We rebagged some corn silage two years ago
and were left with a horrible pile of garbage. The
excellent corn silage had become inedible. Right
now we're using it as part of our compost
program.
Bunk /Aerobic spoilage
More prevalent in corn & small grain silages
Can cause < 50% of losses in silage DM
Spoilage of the top 1m = $500 to $2500 (Bolsen, 1997)

Causes
Air entry into good silage
Air pockets in poor silage
Untidy silo faces
Slow feedout

Effects
Reduce intake
Reduce nutritive value
Produce mycotoxins
Effect of inoculants on aerobic stability of corn
silage (Ranjit & Kung, 2000)
Inoculant Application rate
(cfu/g)
Acronym
Control 0 Control
Lactobacillus buchneri 100,000 LB Mod
Lactobacillus buchneri 1,000,000 LB High
Lactobacillus plantarum 1 1,000,000 LP 1
Lactobacillus plantarum 2 1,000,000 LP 2
Storage-mate NA Store-mate
Effect of inoculants on
composition
0
2.5
5
7.5
10
Acetate
Lactate
WSC (sugars)
%

D
M

C
o
n
t
r
o
l

L
B

x

M
o
d

L
B

x

H
i
g
h

L
P

-
1

L
P
-
2

S
t
o
r
e
-

m
a
t
e

Yeasts (log
10
cfu)
Effect of inoculants on aerobic
stability
A
e
r
o
b
i
c

s
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y


(
h
o
u
r
s
)

27
36
>900
32.8 33
38
C
o
n
t
r
o
l

L
B

x

M
o
d

L
B

x

H
i
g
h

L
P

-
1

L
P
-
2

S
t
o
r
e
-

m
a
t
e

(Ranjit & Kung, 2000)
L. Buchneri Summary
Benefits
Enhanced aerobic stability
No adverse effects on intake (observed so far)

Limitations
More nutrient losses than homofermentative inoculants

Future work
Combining front (homofermentative) & back end
(heterofermentative) inoculants
Silage Additive Regulators
Countries with pre-market screening of additives
UK UKASTA
Canada Ag. Canada
USA None
Take Home Messages
Only use inoculants with
Independent research-attested track record
>90 billion live bacteria / ton
L. plantarum for fermentation enhancement
L. buchneri for bunk life enhancement
Dont choose by cost (35 cents to $1 per ton)
Use only corn silage inoculants for corn silage
Apply at chopper, not into wagon or at bunker
Store in a cool, dry place
Once diluted, use within 24 h.


Silage producers have long recognized the
positive effects of using an inoculant to insure the
proper transformation of forage into a palatable
and digestible feedstuff
Recent quote:
Beware, inoculants are useful but they are neither:
A substitute for bad management
magic potions
Take Home Messages
Harvest promptly (35%DM or 1/3-2/3 milk line)

Sharp knives, chop length
Unprocessed (1/4 3/8 inch)
Processed (3/4 inch)
Take Home Messages
Fill bunker promptly
Pack, pack and pack again
Seal immediately & properly + tires

Take Home Messages
Manage the silo face
Feedout quickly (6 inches/day)
The narrower the bunker, the better
Minimal disturbance
Heat loss = production volatilized

Questions
Effect of delayed sealing on
fermentation (Uriate et al., 2001)
Day Control Additive-treated
Control Immediate
seal

Delayed
(48h) seal
0h seal Delayed
(48h) seal
pH at opening

3.7 3.7 3.5 3.6
pH 4 days later

3.6 8.0 3.7 8.2
Lactic acid at
opening (% DM)
4.5 4.9 4.1 4.5
Lactic acid 4
days later
4.4 0.3 3.9 1.5
Effect of delayed sealing on
stability & yeasts (Uriate et al., 2001)
Day Control Additive-treated
Control Immediate
seal

Delayed
(48h) seal
0h seal Delayed
(48h) seal
Lactate utilizing
Yeasts at opening
4.9 5.7 5.0 5.5
Lactate utilizing
Yeasts 4 days later

8.2 9.4 9.0 8.7
Aerobic stability
(hours)

113 65 137 89
Ensiling losses-
Source % Net Energy lost
Respiration 1-2
Wilting 2-5
Heterofermentative bacteria 4
Secondary Fermentation 0-5
Effluent 5-7
Aerobic spoilage in the silo 0-10
Aerobic spoilage at feedout 0-15
(McDonalds et al., 1991)
How does buchneri work
Uses heterolactic fermentation
More acetate produced
Acetate is an anti-fungal agent
Inhibits-spoilage causing yeasts & moulds

Disadvantages of heterolactic fermentation
Depressed lactate production & higher nutrient losses
Depression in intake if excess acetate is produced


Effect of temperature on corn
silage pH
37
O
C
28
O
C

Target
pH
(Weinberg et al., 2001)
Effect of temperature on corn
silage pH
Inoc, 24
O
C
Control 24
O
C
Inoc, 41
O
C
(Weinberg et al., 2001)

Inoculated silages may spoil more than respective
control silages at high temperatures which inhibit the
growth of inoculant bacteria.

Special care should be taken during silage making and
unloading in warm climates

Florida corn silage producers must do better than
average.

Temperature matters!
Fermentation vs. stability
Traditional view
Conventional inoculants (homofermentative) enhance
fermentation but often reduce bunk life
Cause = Reduced acetic & propionic acid

Emerging view
L. buchneri (heterofermentative) inoculants can improve
bunk life