ABSTRACT
Objectives
Our objectives were to evaluate the storage characteristics and changes in nutritive
value for large-round bales of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.)-orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerate L.) or perennial-grass [orchardgrass; tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Shreb.); meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis Huds.)] hays treated with a propionic acid–based preservative. Applicator delivery
presets were increased by 50% relative to standard factory settings, and hays were
compared against untreated control hays.
Materials and Methods
In Exp. 1, 21 large-round bales (1.2 × 1.5 m; 30.5 ± 1.40% moisture; 88% alfalfa,
12% grass) were produced in a completely randomized design with 2 treatments. Bales
either received a propionic acid–based preservative at 1.0 ± 0.41% of wet bale weight
(n = 11), or no preservative (n = 10), and were stored outdoors on wooden pallets
for 131 d. Experiment 2 was conducted similarly; 26 bales of mixed, perennial-grass
hay (1.2 × 1.5 m; 18.4 ± 1.40% moisture) were either treated with a preservative at
0.25 ± 0.104% of wet bale weight (n = 15) or were untreated (n = 11) and stored in
an identical manner for 40 d.
Results and Discussion
In Exp. 1, application of the preservative reduced maximum internal bale temperatures
during the first 30 d of storage compared with untreated control hays (51.8 vs. 60.6°C;
P < 0.001); similarly, heating degree days >30°C (HDD) were less for treated hays during
the same initial (30-d) time interval (441 vs. 716 HDD; P = 0.001). However, total HDD after 131 d of storage did not differ across treatments
(P = 0.426), largely because of the tendency for greater accumulated HDD in treated
bales from 31 to 131 d in storage (1,105 vs. 761 HDD; P = 0.085). Final energy density (NEl) was greater (P = 0.030) for treated hays compared with untreated control hays (1.26 vs. 1.21 Mcal/kg
DM), but both treatments were depressed from initial prestorage estimates (overall
mean = 1.37 Mcal/kg DM). For Exp. 2, there were no differences (P ≥ 0.185) between treatments for any poststorage measure of nutritive value.
Implications and Applications
For bales made at 30.5% moisture, application of a propionic acid–based preservative
with elevated delivery presets effectively reduced spontaneous heating during the
first month of bale storage, and modestly improved poststorage energy density; however,
any nutritional benefit from treatment was modest, and energy density was still subject
to measurable reductions relative to prestorage estimates.
Key words
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe toAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
LITERATURE CITED
AOAC International. 2019. Official Methods of Analysis, Method #990.03. 21st ed. AOAC International.
Ball, D. M., D. H. Bade, G. D. Lacefield, N. P. Martin, and B. W. Pinkerton. 1998. Minimizing losses in hay storage and feeding. National Forage Information Circular 98–1, Graphic Center.
- Losses and quality changes during harvest and storage of preservative-treated alfalfa hay of varying moisture content..https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.28346Trans. ASAE. 1993; 36: 349-353
- Storage characteristics and nutritive value of moist large-round bales of alfalfa or alfalfa–grass hay treated with a propionic acid–based preservative..https://doi.org/10.15232/aas.2020-02024Appl. Anim. Sci. 2020; 36: 455-470
- Effects of a propionic acid-based preservative on storage characteristics, nutritive value, and energy content for alfalfa hays packaged in large-round bales..https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2011-449622192213J. Dairy Sci. 2012; 95: 340-352
- Storage characteristics, nutritive value, energy content, and in vivo digestibility of moist large-rectangular bales of alfalfa–orchardgrass hay treated with a propionic acid–based preservative..https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-614523415527J. Dairy Sci. 2013; 96: 2521-2535
- Effects of bale moisture and bale diameter on spontaneous heating, dry matter recovery, in vitro true digestibility, and in situ disappearance kinetics of alfalfa-orchardgrass hays..https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-192019448019J. Dairy Sci. 2009; 92 (a): 2853-2874
- Effects of spontaneous heating on fiber composition, fiber digestibility, and in situ disappearance kinetics of neutral detergent fiber for alfalfa-orchardgrass hays..https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-192119448020J. Dairy Sci. 2009; 92 (b): 2875-2895
Collins, M. 1995. Hay preservation effects on yield and quality. Pages 67–89 in Post-Harvest Physiology and Preservation of Forages. Proc. C-6 CSSA Symposium, Minneapolis, MN. K. J. Moore and M. A. Peterson, ed. CSSA Special Publication 22. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA. https://doi.org/10.2135/cssaspecpub22.c4.
- Moisture and storage effects on dry matter and quality losses of alfalfa in round bales..https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.30498Trans. ASAE. 1987; 30: 913-917
- Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances..https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60111a017Anal. Chem. 1956; 28: 350-356
- The effect of harvest moisture and bale wrapping on forage quality, temperature, and mold in orchardgrass hay..https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jevs.2011.05.003J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2011; 31: 711-716
- A network algorithm for performing Fisher’s exact test in r × c contingency tables..https://doi.org/10.2307/2288652J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1983; 78: 427-434
NASEM. 2001. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle. 7th rev. ed. National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9825.
- Preservation of alfalfa hay with propionic acid..https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.26187Appl. Eng. Agric. 1991; 7: 33-40
Rotz, C. A., and R. E. Muck. 1994. Changes in forage quality during harvest and storage. p. 828–868. Forage quality, evaluation, and utilization. Proc. Natl. Conf. on Forage Quality, Evaluation, and Utilization, Lincoln, NE. G. C. Fahey et al., ed. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA. https://doi.org/10.2134/1994.foragequality.c20.
SAS Institute Inc. 2016. Version 9.4. SAS Institute Inc.
- Evaluation of dry matter loss, nutritive value, and in situ dry matter disappearance for wilting orchardgrass and bermudagrass forages damaged by simulated rainfall..https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2005.0604Agron. J. 2005; 97: 604-614
- Effects of organic preservatives on the quality of aerobically stored high moisture baled hay..https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1975.00021962006700050019xAgron. J. 1975; 67: 660-662
- Evaluation of methods to improve storage characteristics of large square bales in a humid environment..https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.5218Appl. Eng. Agric. 2000; 16: 341-350
Van Soest, P. J. 1982. Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. Cornell University Press.
- Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition..https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-21660498J. Dairy Sci. 1991; 74: 3583-3597
- Individual comparisons by ranking methods..https://doi.org/10.2307/3001968Biom. Bull. 1945; 1: 80-83
Article info
Publication history
Accepted:
December 20,
2021
Received:
October 20,
2021
Footnotes
The authors have not declared any conflicts of interest.
Identification
Copyright
© 2022 American Registry of Professional Animal Scientists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
