ArticleAnimal bioscience2022
Fermentative products and bacterial community structure of C4 forage silage in response to epiphytic microbiota from C3 forages.
Article in Animal bioscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fermentation quality and microbial communities of mixed silage from Pennisetum glaucum × purpureum and Rosa roxburghii residue.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Effects of growth stage and moisture content on the fermentation profile, chemical composition, and bacterial community structure of triticale silage.AMB Express · 2026Article
- The Relationship between Microbial Communities in Coffee Fermentation and Aroma with Metabolite Attributes of Finished Products.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Improvement of silage characteristics ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe observation that temperate C3 and tropical C4 forage silages easily produce large amounts of ethanol or acetic acid has puzzled researchers for many years. Hence, this study aimed to assess the effects of epiphytic microbiota from C3 forages (Italian ryegrass and oat) on fermentative products and bacterial community structure in C4 forage (sorghum) silage.
methodsThrough microbiota transplantation and γ-ray irradiation sterilization, the irradiated sorghum was treated: i) sterile distilled water (STSG); ii) epiphytic microbiota from sorghum (SGSG); iii) epiphytic microbiota from Italian ryegrass (SGIR); iv) epiphytic microbiota from oat (SGOT).
resultsAfter 60 days, all the treated groups had high lactic acid (>63.0 g/kg dry matter [DM]) contents and low pH values (<3.70), acetic acid (<14.0 g/kg DM) and ammonia nitrogen (<80.0 g/kg total nitrogen) contents. Notably, SGIR (59.8 g/kg DM) and SGOT (77.6 g/kg DM) had significantly (p<0.05) higher ethanol concentrations than SGSG (14.2 g/kg DM) on day 60. After 60 days, Lactobacillus were predominant genus in three treated groups. Higher proportions of Chishuiella (12.9%) and Chryseobacterium (7.33%) were first found in silages. The ethanol contents had a positive correlation (p<0.05) with the abundances of Chishuiella, Acinetobacter, Stenotrophomonas, Chryseobacterium, and Sphingobacterium.
conclusionThe epiphytic bacteria on raw materials played important roles in influencing the silage fermentation products between temperate C3 and tropical C4 forages. The quantity and activity of hetero-fermentative Lactobacillus, Chishuiella, Acinetobacter, Stenotrophomonas, Chryseobacterium, and Sphingobacterium may be the key factors for the higher ethanol contents and DM loss in silages.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.