Silagem de cana-de-açúcar tratada com inoculantes microbianos e suas misturas

Abstract

Objetivou-se avaliar a composição química, o perfil fermentativo, a população de micro-organismo e a recuperação de matéria seca de silagens de cana-de-açúcar tratada com diferentes misturas de inoculantes microbianos. O experimento foi conduzido no delineamento inteiramente casualizado, com seis tratamentos e três repetições. Os tratamentos consistiram de silagem de cana-de-açúcar (SC) (controle); SC + Lactobacillus buchneri; SC + Propionibacterium acidipropionici; SC + P. acidipropionici + Lactobacillus plantarum; SC + L. buchneri + P. acidipropionici; SC + L. buchneri + P. acidipropionici + L. plantarum. A forragem foi picada e ensilada em baldes com capacidade de 20 L, providos com válvulas de “Bunsen”, os quais foram abertos 90 dias após o fechamento. Os inoculantes microbianos e suas misturas não proporcionam resultados promissores sobre a composição química, o perfil fermentativo, as populações microbianas e a recuperação de matéria seca da silagem de cana-de-açúcar. Mais alta produção de etanol ocorreu com a mistura de Lactobacillus buchneri + Propionibacterium acidipropionici e mais baixa recuperação de matéria seca ocorreu com as misturas P. acidipropionici + Lactobacillus plantarum e L. buchneri + P. acidipropionici + L. plantarum, em relação ao controle.

This study aimed to evaluate the chemical composition, fermentation profile, the population of microorganisms and the recovery of dry sugarcane silages. The experiment was conducted in a completely randomized design with six treatments and three replications. Treatments consisted of silage of sugarcane (SC) (Control); SC + Lactobacillus buchneri (LB); SC + Propionibacterium acidipropionici (PA); SC + P. acidipropionici + Lactobacillus plantarum (PALP); SC + L. buchneri + P. acidipropionici (LBPA); SC + L. buchneri + P. acidipropionici + L. plantarum (LBPALP). Forage was designed with buckets with a capacity of 20 liters, with Bunsen valves, which were opened 90 days after the sealing. It was verified that only the LB treatment provided the DM content for the control of silage (23.2%). There was no inoculation effect in an effluent production, whose average was 104.31 kg / t MN. The treatments with PALP and LBPALP resulted in lower dry matter recovery than a silage control. Ammonia contents and pH were increased by treatments with LBPA and LBPALP in relation to control silage. There was no difference between the treatments for populations of lactic acid bacteria and yeasts, whose mean values were 9.06 and 4.27 log cfu / g, respectively. It was verified a higher lactic acid content in the LBPALP silage in relation to the control (2.24%). The silage with LBPA presented higher ethanol content (6.15%) in relation to control silage and PA. Thus, it is concluded that the inoculants and their mixtures do not provide promising results regarding the chemical composition, fermentation profile and dry matter recovery of sugarcane silage.