| |
|
|
| Registros recuperados : 285 | |
| 81. |  | PEDROSO, A. de F.; ESTEVES, S. N.; BARIONI JUNIOR, W.; SOUZA, G. B. de. Chemical composition, fermentation profile and apparent digestibility of sugarcane silage treated with chemical additives. Boletim de Indústria Animal, Nova Odessa, v. 74, n. 3, p. 182-194, 2017.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. |
|    |
| 82. | | MENDES, G.; FIGUEIREDO, R. A.; SOUZA, G. B. de; ALMEIDA, V. C. de; MACHADO, R. Composição em nutrientes das diferentes partes da bananeira. In: JORNADA CIENTÍFICA-EMBRAPA SÃO CARLOS, 2009, São Carlos, SP. Anais... São Carlos, SP: Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste: Embrapa Instrumentação Agropecuária, 2009. p. 116. (Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. Documento 90).| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. |
| |
| 83. | | MENDES, G.; FIGUEIREDO, R. A.; SOUZA, G. B. de; ALMEIDA, V. C. de; MACHADO, R. Composição em nutrientes da silagem de capim furachão (Panicum repens). In: JORNADA CIENTÍFICA-EMBRAPA SÃO CARLOS, 2009, São Carlos, SP. Anais... São Carlos, SP: Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste: Embrapa Instrumentação Agropecuária, 2009. p. 117.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. |
| |
| 89. | | BERNARDI, A. C. de C.; SOUZA, G. B. de; VALLE, F.; MAGEN, H. Comparing polyhalite and KCl in alfalfa fertilization. In: INTERNATIONAL PLANT NUTRITION COLLOQUIUM, 18., 2017, Copenhagen, Denmark. Proceedings... Copenhagen, Denmark: IPNC, 2017. p. 305-306.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. |
| |
| 95. | | BOSSU, C. M.; SOUZA, G. B. de; SILVA, P. H. T.; NOGUEIRA, A. R. de A. Ensaio de proficiência para amostra de feno de alfafa candidata a material de referência. In: ENCONTRO NACIONAL DE QUÍMICA ANALÍTICA, 15.; CONGRESSO IBEROAMERICANO DE QUÍMICA ANALÍTICA, 3., 2009, Salvador, BA. Anais... Salvador: SBQ: UFBA, 2009.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. |
| |
| 98. | | MENEZES, E. A.; CAMARGO, L. A.; SOUZA, G. B. de; NOGUEIRA, A. R. de A. Influence of heat processing on the bioavailability of CA, CU, fe, mg, and zn from beef pork and chiken consumed in Brazil. In: RIO SYMPOSIUM ON ATOMIC SPECTROMETRY, 11., 2010, Mar del Prata: Horiba, 2010. p. 115| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. |
|  |
| Registros recuperados : 285 | |
|
|
|
Registro Completo
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. |
|
Data corrente: |
15/01/2015 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
21/03/2023 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Artigo em Periódico Indexado |
|
Circulação/Nível: |
B - 1 |
|
Autoria: |
PEDROSO, A. de F.; PEDROSO, A. M.; BARIONI JUNIOR, W.; SOUZA, G. B. de. |
|
Afiliação: |
ANDRE DE FARIA PEDROSO, CPPSE; ALEXANDRE MENDONCA PEDROSO, CPPSE; WALDOMIRO BARIONI JUNIOR, CPPSE; GILBERTO BATISTA DE SOUZA, CPPSE. |
|
Título: |
Evaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2014 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia , v. 43, n. 4, p. 169-174, apr. 2014. |
|
ISSN: |
1806-9290 |
|
DOI: |
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982014000400002 |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
The objective was to evaluate the effects of laboratory-silo type and method of silage extract production, respectively, on sugarcane silage fermentation and recovery of fermentation products. Sugarcane was mechanically harvested and ensiled in three different types of laboratory silos (five replicates): 9.7 × 30 cm PVC tubes with tight lids, equipped or unequipped with Bunsen valves, and 20 L plastic buckets with tight lids and Bunsen valves. Three methods were used to produce silage extracts for pH, ethanol, acetic and lactic acids determination: extraction of silage juice by a hydraulic press and production of water extracts using a stomacher or a blender. Total dry matter loss (231 g/kg DM) was not affected by silo type. No interactions between silo type and method of silage extract production were observed for ethanol and organic acids contents in the silages. Interaction between silo type and method of silage extract preparation was detected for pH. Silo type affected ethanol content but did not affect lactic and acetic acids concentration in the silages. Dry matter, crude protein, neutral detergent fiber and ash were not affected by silo type. The method used to produce silage extracts affected the recovery of all fermentation products analyzed in the silages. Recovery of ethanol and acetic acid was higher when silage extracts were produced using a blender. For lactic acid recovery, the hydraulic press method was superior to the other two methods. Silage fermentation pattern is not affected by silo type, but the method used to produce silage extracts and some characteristics of silos affect the recovery of volatile fermentation products. MenosThe objective was to evaluate the effects of laboratory-silo type and method of silage extract production, respectively, on sugarcane silage fermentation and recovery of fermentation products. Sugarcane was mechanically harvested and ensiled in three different types of laboratory silos (five replicates): 9.7 × 30 cm PVC tubes with tight lids, equipped or unequipped with Bunsen valves, and 20 L plastic buckets with tight lids and Bunsen valves. Three methods were used to produce silage extracts for pH, ethanol, acetic and lactic acids determination: extraction of silage juice by a hydraulic press and production of water extracts using a stomacher or a blender. Total dry matter loss (231 g/kg DM) was not affected by silo type. No interactions between silo type and method of silage extract production were observed for ethanol and organic acids contents in the silages. Interaction between silo type and method of silage extract preparation was detected for pH. Silo type affected ethanol content but did not affect lactic and acetic acids concentration in the silages. Dry matter, crude protein, neutral detergent fiber and ash were not affected by silo type. The method used to produce silage extracts affected the recovery of all fermentation products analyzed in the silages. Recovery of ethanol and acetic acid was higher when silage extracts were produced using a blender. For lactic acid recovery, the hydraulic press method was superior to the other two methods. Silage fermentation ... Mostrar Tudo |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Ethanolc; Laboratory silo; Silage extract; Sugarcane silage. |
|
Thesaurus NAL: |
acetic acid; lactic acid. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
W Química e Física |
|
URL: |
https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/115581/1/PROCI-2014.00220.pdf
|
|
Marc: |
LEADER 02430naa a2200253 a 4500
001 2005632
005 2023-03-21
008 2014 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
022 $a1806-9290
024 7 $ahttps://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982014000400002$2DOI
100 1 $aPEDROSO, A. de F.
245 $aEvaluation of sugarcane laboratory ensiling and analysis techniques.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2014
520 $aThe objective was to evaluate the effects of laboratory-silo type and method of silage extract production, respectively, on sugarcane silage fermentation and recovery of fermentation products. Sugarcane was mechanically harvested and ensiled in three different types of laboratory silos (five replicates): 9.7 × 30 cm PVC tubes with tight lids, equipped or unequipped with Bunsen valves, and 20 L plastic buckets with tight lids and Bunsen valves. Three methods were used to produce silage extracts for pH, ethanol, acetic and lactic acids determination: extraction of silage juice by a hydraulic press and production of water extracts using a stomacher or a blender. Total dry matter loss (231 g/kg DM) was not affected by silo type. No interactions between silo type and method of silage extract production were observed for ethanol and organic acids contents in the silages. Interaction between silo type and method of silage extract preparation was detected for pH. Silo type affected ethanol content but did not affect lactic and acetic acids concentration in the silages. Dry matter, crude protein, neutral detergent fiber and ash were not affected by silo type. The method used to produce silage extracts affected the recovery of all fermentation products analyzed in the silages. Recovery of ethanol and acetic acid was higher when silage extracts were produced using a blender. For lactic acid recovery, the hydraulic press method was superior to the other two methods. Silage fermentation pattern is not affected by silo type, but the method used to produce silage extracts and some characteristics of silos affect the recovery of volatile fermentation products.
650 $aacetic acid
650 $alactic acid
653 $aEthanolc
653 $aLaboratory silo
653 $aSilage extract
653 $aSugarcane silage
700 1 $aPEDROSO, A. M.
700 1 $aBARIONI JUNIOR, W.
700 1 $aSOUZA, G. B. de
773 $tRevista Brasileira de Zootecnia$gv. 43, n. 4, p. 169-174, apr. 2014.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste (CPPSE) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
Fechar
|
| Nenhum registro encontrado para a expressão de busca informada. |
|
|
