02029nam a2200265 a 450000100080000000500110000800800410001902200140006010000210007424501600009526002200025552010720047565000220154765000170156965300100158665300160159665300130161270000190162570000220164470000200166670000170168670000160170370000230171970000210174221195972020-01-30       2019    bl uuuu     u00u1 u    #d  a2175-46241 aBEHLING NETO, A.  aCan we use the methodology of silage dry matter content correction defined in Europe with the samples drying methods used in Brazil?h[electronic resource]  aINTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON FORAGE QUALITY AND CONSERVATION, 6., 2019, Piracicaba. Proceedings [eletrônico]... Piracicaba: Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture, University of São Paulo, 2019. não paginado.c2019  aThe first step for chemical evaluation is the feed drying in forced air oven. Then, to determine the feed dry matter (DM) content, after grinding the sample in a mill, a second drying is done at 105°C to evaporate remaining water. However, for silage samples, part of the fermentation products can be lost by volatilization, so, the correction of DM content is required to obtain proper water content. According to Weissbach and Strubelt (2008 a,b), it is possible to correct this variable in maize and grass samples, using an equation that includes the fermentation products concentrations, if the forage processing consists of preliminary drying at 60 to 65 °C, with a second drying for three hours at 105 °C. However, in Brazil, the most common DM content evaluation is described by Detmann et al. (2012), which consists in drying in a forced ventilation oven at 55 to 60 ºC for 24 to 72, followed by a second drying in an oven at 105ºC for 16 h. So, the goal was to verify if these different methodologies for DM content measurement provides similar results.  aChemical analysis  aGrass silage  aMaize  aMato Grosso  aSinop-MT1 aPEREIRA, D. H.1 aPEDREIRA, B. C. e1 aSILVA, L. A. L.1 aAMARO, M. R.1 aPOPE, A. M.1 aCARVALHO, A. P. S.1 aDOMICIANO, L. F.