Paper · 2016 · Journal of Animal Science

0683 Meta-analysis of the effect of homolactic and facultative heterolactic bacteria inoculation on silage quality: I – Fermentation profile

A. S. Oliveira; Z. G. Weinberg; A. A. P. Cervantes; et al.

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Homolactic and facultative heterolactic acid bacteria (HAB) inoculants enhance silage fermentation by rapid production of lactic acid, which decreases the pH and reduces DM and nutrient losses. Data from 120 peer-reviewed papers were summarized to evaluate the effects of inoculation with HAB on silage fermentation profile. The effects were analyzed by comparing raw mean differences between inoculant and control treatment means that had been weighted by inverse variance using random models. Heterogeneity sources evaluated by meta-regression included crop species, application rate (<104, 105 to 106 or >107 cfu/g, representing 3.7, 93.6 and 2.7% of studies, respectively), HAB species, and silo type (laboratory or farm-scale) as covariates. Inoculation did not affect the pH of corn/sorghum silages (P = 0.34, n = 59) but reduced the pH (P < 0.05) of temperate grasses (−0.17; n = 60), tropical grasses (−0.17; n = 17), sugarcane (−0.03; n = 28), alfalfa (−0.30; n = 8), other legumes (−0.25; n = 29), and other crops (−0.26; n = 17). Inoculation increased lactate (0.97% DM; P < 0.01, n = 249) and reduced butyrate (−0.05% DM; P < 0.01, n = 56) but did not affect propionate (P = 0.61, n = 109). Inoculation did not affect acetate in alfalfa silages (P = 0.15, n = 9) but reduced acetate in corn/sorghum (−0.10% DM; P < 0.01, n = 57), temperate grasses (−0.30% DM; P < 0.01, n = 71), tropical grasses (−0.16% DM; P = 0.03, n = 19), sugarcane (−0.34% DM; P < 0.01, n = 26), other legumes (−0.47% DM; P < 0.01, n = 24), and other crops (−0.11% DM; P < 0.01, n = 12). Inoculation did not affect NH3–N (% total nitrogen) concentration in corn/sorghum (P = 0.63, n = 22) or sugarcane (P = 0.33, n = 5) but reduced it (P < 0.01) in temperate grasses (−2.17% N; n = 49), tropical grasses (−1.78% N; n = 9), alfalfa (−1.47% N; n = 6), other legumes (−1.77% N; n = 18), and other crops (−1.36% N; n = 9). Inoculation with HAB did not improve the fermentation of corn/sorghum silages or sugarcane silage but markedly improved those of grasses, legumes, and other crop silages independent of the HAB species.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

HAB inoculation did not significantly change corn/sorghum silage pH.

Treatment
Inoculatione0
Interactor
HABe1symbiont
Outcome
pHe0
Direction
did not affecte0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Sorghum
Sorghum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Evelyn Simak · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Inoculation did not affect the pH of corn/sorghum silages (P = 0.34, n = 59)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–823 · show in text ↑
e1

“Homolactic and facultative heterolactic acid bacteria (HAB) inoculants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–70 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

HAB inoculation reduced pH in temperate grasses.

Taxon
temperate grassese0
Treatment
Inoculatione0
Interactor
HABe1symbiont
Outcome
pHe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
−0.17e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Inoculation did not affect the pH of corn/sorghum silages (P = 0.34, n = 59) but reduced the pH (P < 0.05) of temperate grasses (−0.17; n = 60), tropical grasses (−0.17; n = 17), sugarcane (−0.03; n = 28), alfalfa (−0.30; n = 8), other legumes (−0.25; n = 29), and other crops (−0.26; n = 17).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–1040 · show in text ↑
e1

“Homolactic and facultative heterolactic acid bacteria (HAB) inoculants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–70 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

HAB inoculation reduced pH in tropical grasses.

Taxon
tropical grassese0
Treatment
Inoculatione0
Interactor
HABe1symbiont
Outcome
pHe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
−0.17e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Inoculation did not affect the pH of corn/sorghum silages (P = 0.34, n = 59) but reduced the pH (P < 0.05) of temperate grasses (−0.17; n = 60), tropical grasses (−0.17; n = 17), sugarcane (−0.03; n = 28), alfalfa (−0.30; n = 8), other legumes (−0.25; n = 29), and other crops (−0.26; n = 17).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–1040 · show in text ↑
e1

“Homolactic and facultative heterolactic acid bacteria (HAB) inoculants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–70 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

HAB inoculation reduced pH in sugarcane.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Treatment
Inoculatione0
Interactor
HABe1symbiont
Outcome
pHe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
−0.03e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Inoculation did not affect the pH of corn/sorghum silages (P = 0.34, n = 59) but reduced the pH (P < 0.05) of temperate grasses (−0.17; n = 60), tropical grasses (−0.17; n = 17), sugarcane (−0.03; n = 28), alfalfa (−0.30; n = 8), other legumes (−0.25; n = 29), and other crops (−0.26; n = 17).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–1040 · show in text ↑
e1

“Homolactic and facultative heterolactic acid bacteria (HAB) inoculants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–70 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

HAB inoculation reduced pH in alfalfa.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Treatment
Inoculatione0
Interactor
HABe1symbiont
Outcome
pHe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
−0.30e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Inoculation did not affect the pH of corn/sorghum silages (P = 0.34, n = 59) but reduced the pH (P < 0.05) of temperate grasses (−0.17; n = 60), tropical grasses (−0.17; n = 17), sugarcane (−0.03; n = 28), alfalfa (−0.30; n = 8), other legumes (−0.25; n = 29), and other crops (−0.26; n = 17).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–1040 · show in text ↑
e1

“Homolactic and facultative heterolactic acid bacteria (HAB) inoculants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–70 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

HAB inoculation reduced pH in other legumes.

Taxon
other legumese0
Treatment
Inoculatione0
Interactor
HABe1symbiont
Outcome
pHe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
−0.25e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Inoculation did not affect the pH of corn/sorghum silages (P = 0.34, n = 59) but reduced the pH (P < 0.05) of temperate grasses (−0.17; n = 60), tropical grasses (−0.17; n = 17), sugarcane (−0.03; n = 28), alfalfa (−0.30; n = 8), other legumes (−0.25; n = 29), and other crops (−0.26; n = 17).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–1040 · show in text ↑
e1

“Homolactic and facultative heterolactic acid bacteria (HAB) inoculants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–70 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

HAB inoculation reduced pH in other crops.

Taxon
other cropse0
Treatment
Inoculatione0
Interactor
HABe1symbiont
Outcome
pHe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
−0.26e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Inoculation did not affect the pH of corn/sorghum silages (P = 0.34, n = 59) but reduced the pH (P < 0.05) of temperate grasses (−0.17; n = 60), tropical grasses (−0.17; n = 17), sugarcane (−0.03; n = 28), alfalfa (−0.30; n = 8), other legumes (−0.25; n = 29), and other crops (−0.26; n = 17).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–1040 · show in text ↑
e1

“Homolactic and facultative heterolactic acid bacteria (HAB) inoculants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–70 · show in text ↑

inoculation · soil: chemistry · SorghumPositive and negative results

14 papers: 10 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

inoculation · soil: chemistry · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results

44 papers: 42 positive, 2 negative or no effect

41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

40 papers more in this group

See all 44 papers →

inoculation · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

71 papers: 62 positive, 9 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 62 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

67 papers more in this group

See all 71 papers →

inoculation · soil: chemistry · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.