CSIRO PUBLISHING

Crop & Pasture Science, 2021, 72, 467–473

https://doi.org/10.1071/CP20516

Fermentative profile and nutritional value of sugarcane

silages inoculated with a mixture of fibrolytic enzymes

Mariana Campana A, Bruno S. Carmo A, Rafael M. Santos B, Thainá M. Garcia A,

Estéfani Capucho A, Eduardo B. de Azevedo B, Jozivaldo P. G. de Morais A,
and Tiago A. Del Valle B,C,D
A
Department of Biotechnology Vegetal and Animal Production, Agricultural Science Center,
Federal University of São Carlos, Araras, SP 13600-970, Brazil.
B
Itaqui Campus, Federal University of Pampa, Itaqui, RS 97650-000, Brazil.
C
Department of Animal Science, Rural Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Maria, RS, Brazil.
D
Corresponding author. Email: tiago.valle@ufsm.br

Abstract. Sugarcane has a high yield potential; however, ensiling has been a challenge, and its fibre has low quality
for ruminant feed. This study aimed to evaluate increasing levels of a fibrolytic enzymatic blend (300 U xylanase + 300
U cellulase/g) during sugarcane ensiling on fermentative profile, losses, chemical composition, in vitro degradation, and
aerobic stability. Forty silos were assigned to four treatments: 0, 200, 400 and 600 mg enzymatic blend/kg sugarcane
fresh matter. The trial was performed in a randomised blocked design, in which five sugarcane cultivars were defined as
blocks. Silos were performed in 15-L PVC tubes and stored at room temperature for 45 days. Enzyme level did not
affect silage pH, ammonia-N, soluble carbohydrates, ethanol, or organic acid concentration. Although increasing
enzyme levels linearly increased effluent losses, there was no effect on gas losses or dry matter recovery. Treatment had
no effect on silage chemical composition, in vitro degradation, or silage pH after aerobic exposure. However, enzyme
treatment quadratically affected silage temperature after aerobic exposure and aerobic stability period. Intermediate
levels of enzymes increased silage temperature after aerobic exposure and reduced the aerobic stability period.
Therefore, addition of enzymes during sugarcane ensiling shows no effect on silage fermentation, nutritional value or
dry matter recovery, but linearly increases effluent losses. Although an intermediate level of enzymes decreases aerobic
stability, it has no effect on silage pH after aerobic exposure.

Keywords: cellulose, in vitro techniques, organic acids, silage, sugarcane, yeast.

Received 22 December 2020, accepted 21 April 2021, published online 2 July 2021

Introduction increase fermentative losses and fibre content in the

Sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) has high productivity (25–40 t/ha
dry matter (DM); Ávila et al. 2010) and agronomic
characteristics that favour its utilisation as a forage source
in ruminant diets. In addition, it has high palatability for
animals, and its harvest period coincides with low pasture
availability. Therefore, it could improve the nutritional value
of the diet of grazing animals. However, harvest of sugarcane
requires labour for daily cuts and impairs crop management. A
commonly used technique to solve these problems is sugarcane
ensiling. Concentrated harvest prevents losses due to fires and
frost, and it extends the useful life of fields (Pedroso et al.
2007).
Epiphyte yeasts of sugarcane can aerobically consume
sugars and lactate to produce ethanol (McDonald et al.
1991). Sugarcane has a high level of water-soluble
carbohydrates (sucrose), and silage fermentation is typically
alcoholic (Ávila et al. 2010). These fermentative conditions
silage. High fibre level reduces the nutritional losses of
silage, especially when it has a high lignin content. Silage
additives can improve the quality of silage (Cantoia Júnior
et al. 2020), and in this context, exogenous enzymes have been
used to improve fibre digestibility and to reduce fermentation
losses and aerobic deterioration of silages (Muck et al. 2018).
Our research group previously evaluated increasing xylanase
levels during the sugarcane ensiling (Del Valle et al. 2018).
We had hypothesised that xylan degradation produces acetic
acid, which has an inhibitory effect on mould and yeast
growth. Although intermediary levels of xylanase reduced
neutral detergent fibre (NDF) content, there was an increase
in fermentative losses, and no effects were observed on DM
in vitro degradation because those levels of xylanase decreased
NDF degradation.
In the present study, we aimed to study effects of other
fibrolytic enzymes on sugarcane nutritional value. Cellulases

Journal compilation
CSIRO 2021 www.publish.csiro.au/journals/cp

468 Crop & Pasture Science
catalyse cell-wall carbohydrate digestion, improving the
extension of silage degradation (Cysneiros et al. 2006). The
synergy between cellulases and xylanases in the rumen has been
extensively documented (Morgavi et al. 2000), including cross-
feeding of hydrolyses products, utilisation of end products, and
production of essential nutrients. However, to the best of our
knowledge, no study has evaluated the association of fibrolytic
enzymes (xylanase and cellulase) in sugarcane ensiling. We
hypothesised that the xylanase and cellulase association could
increase the degradation of sugarcane fibre and reduce
fermentative losses and temperature after aerobic exposure as
a result of improved acetic acid concentration. This study aimed
to evaluate the effects of levels of a fibrolytic enzyme blend
(cellulase and xylanase) during sugarcane ensiling on
fermentative profile and losses, chemical composition, in vitro
degradation, and aerobic stability.
Material and methods
The trial was performed at the Agrarian Sciences centre of São
Carlos Federal University (UFSCar). The Animal Ethics
Committee from UFSCar previously approved all procedures
involving animals (approval number: 9837230817).
Forty experimental silos were used in a blocked randomised
design obtained from different sugarcane cultivars
(RB975201, RB975242, RB935744, RB975952, and
RB985476), from the Program of Sugarcane Genetic
Improvement (RIDESA/UFSCar). Sugarcane cultivars were
defined as blocks and eight silos (two for each of four enzyme
treatments) were made from each cultivar. Sugarcane
(12 months of regrowth and third cut) was manually
harvested at 5 cm height and processed in a stationary mill
(TRF300; Trapp, Jaraguá do Sul, Brazil) to allow 600–700 g/
kg fresh of particles >8 mm (Maulfair et al. 2011). A sample of
each sugarcane cultivar was collected for chemical analysis
and in vitro assay. Four levels of a blend of fibrolytic enzymes
were evaluated: 0, 200, 400 and 600 mg enzymes/kg
DM. Enzymes were obtained from Kera Animal Nutrition
and comprised 300 U xylanase and 300 U cellulase/g. The
material for each silo was individually weighed to reach 600
kg/m3 fresh matter, and the enzymes were topdressed and
manually mixed before ensiling. Ensiling was performed in
laboratory silos (buckets of 15 L volume containing a 5-kg
lower layer of sand to collect effluent). After compaction, silos
were sealed using adhesive tape.
Forty-five days after ensiling, silos were weighed and
opened. Sugarcane silage of the top (5 cm) and the lower
layer was discarded, and the silage was removed from the
silos, homogenised and sampled. The silage sample (~300 g
fresh matter) was pressed in a hydraulic press (PHE-45;
Engehidro, Piracicaba, Brazil) (Cantoia Júnior et al. 2020),
and the silage fluid was filtered using two layers of
cheesecloth. Silage pH was immediately evaluated with a
digital potentiometer (LUCA-210; Lucadema, Sao José do
Rio Preto, Brazil), using the refractometric method (990.35;
AOAC 2000) to assess silage Brix. Ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N)
was evaluated via the Kjeldahl method (984.13; AOAC 2000),
without acid digestion. The fluid sample was diluted in formic
acid (1:4 ratio) and injected (1 mL) into a gas chromatograph
M. Campana et al.
(GC-2010 Plus Chromatograph; Shimadzu, Barueri, Brazil),
using helium as the carrier gas (42 cm/s). Injector and detector
temperatures were 2508C and 3008C, respectively. Column
temperature heating starts with an initial increase from 408C to
1208C at 408C/min, followed by an increase at 108C/min
between 1208C and 1808C, and another at 1208C/min from
1808C to 2408C. Calibration was performed by using diluted
solutions of the organic acids (WSFA-2 standard, ref. 47056;
Supelco) and ethanol (ref. 459828; Sigma-Aldrich). The lactic
acid was analysed using the spectrophotometric (560 nm)
method (Pryce 1969).
Fermentative losses were calculated as recommended by
Jobim et al. (2007). The difference in the entire silo after
ensiling and before opening was used to access gas losses.
Effluent losses were calculated as the weight gain of the lower
layer of sand. Total losses were obtained by the sum of gas and
effluent losses. Fermentative losses were expressed relative to
total DM ensiled. DM recovery was calculated by the ratio
between final and initial silage DM.
Silage and fresh sugarcane samples were processed in a
knife mill (1-mm sieve) and analysed for DM (method
950.15), ash (method 942.05), crude protein (CP; N
6.25;
method 984.13; Kjeldahl method) and ether extract (EE;
method 920.39) according to AOAC (2000). Neutral
detergent fibre (NDF) and acid detergent fibre (ADF) were
analysed using a-amylase and expressed including residual
ash (Van Soest et al. 1991). Non-fiber carbohydrate (NFC) was
calculated as: NFC (g/kg DM) = 1000 – (NDF + CP + ash +
EE). DM and NDF degradation were evaluated according to
Holden (1999). Silage and fresh sugarcane samples were
processed in a knife mill (2-mm sieve), placed in non-
woven fabric tissue (TNT, 100 g/m2, 5 by 5 cm), and
incubated for 48 h at 398C in an in vitro incubator (NL162;
New Laboratory, Piracicaba, Brazil). Before the incubation,
the inoculum was produced using McDougall (1948) buffer
and ruminal fluid sampled from two Holstein heifers (400 kg
bodyweight) maintained in a grazing system without
supplementation. After removal from the incubator, bags
were washed in running tap water and analysed for NDF
content. Chemical composition of fresh sugarcane is
presented in Table 1.
After silage removal from the buckets, a silage sample
(3 kg) was placed in the buckets without compaction and
Table 1. Chemical composition of fresh sugarcane (n = 5 cultivars)
Item Mean Standard deviation
Dry matter (g/kg fresh matter) 218 31.6
Chemical composition (g/kg DM):
Organic matter 977 5.0
Neutral detergent fibre 535 74.6
Acid detergent fibre 474 70.8
Non-fibre carbohydrate 404 82.9
Acid detergent lignin 91.1 15.4
Crude protein 28.3 5.02
Ether extract 9.73 2.21
In vitro degradation (g/kg):
Dry matter 606 57.3
Neutral detergent fibre 358 178.2
Fibrolytic enzymes in sugarcane ensiling Crop & Pasture Science 469

maintained in a room with controlled temperature (21.30 
1.248C) for 144 h. Buckets were kept capped between
evaluations to avoid temperature dissipation. Aerobic stability
was defined as the number of hours that silage was exposed to air
before a 28C increment in temperature above the environmental
temperature (Borreani and Tabacco 2010). Silage temperature
was evaluated every 8 h using a spit thermometer (K29-5030;
Kasvi Produtos Laboratoriais, Pinhais, Brazil). Silage pH was
evaluated every 24 h, as previously described.
Statistical analyses
Data were analysed using the PROC MIXED procedure of
SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA), considering
the following model:
Yijk ¼ m þ ENZi þ sj þ eijk
with sj  N(0,ss2) and eijk  N(0,se2), where Yijk is the
observed value, m is the general mean, ENZi is the fixed
effect of exogenous enzyme level (i = 1–4), sj is the
random effect of sugarcane cultivar (j = 1–5), eijk is the
random experimental error, N stands for Gaussian
distribution, ss2 is variance associated with sugarcane
cultivar, and se2 is the variance associated with residue.
Gas losses through the ensiling period, pH, and temperature
after aerobic exposure were evaluated as repeated-measures
using the present model:
Yijkl ¼ m þ ENZi þ sj þ vijk þ Tl þ ENZ
Til þ eijkl
with sj  N(0,ss2), vijk  N(0,sv2) and eijk  MVN(0,R), where
Yijk is the observed value; m, ENZi and sj are as previously
defined; vijk is the error associated with experimental units
(silos); Tl is the fixed effect of evaluation time (l = 1–4 for
gas losses through the ensiling period, 1–18 for temperature, and
1–6 for pH after aerobic exposure); ENZ
Til is the fixed
interaction effect between enzyme and time; eijkl is the
experimental error; N stands for Gaussian distribution; ss2
and sv2 are the variances associated with sugarcane cultivar
and silo, respectively; MVN stands for multivariance normal
distribution; and R is a variance and covariance matrix, due to
repeated-measures. Covariance matrix structures (CS, CSH, AR,
ARH, TOEP, TOEPH, FA, UN, ANTE) were evaluated using
the Bayesian method. For all analyses, ENZ effects were
decomposed using orthogonal contrasts for linear, quadratic
and cubic (deviation of quadratic) effects. Significance was
declared at P  0.05, and a tendency was considered where
0.05 < P  0.10.
Results
Addition of fibrolytic enzymes (xylanase and cellulase) did
not affect (P  0.41) silage pH, NH3-N, soluble carbohydrates
or ethanol concentration of silage (Table 2). Silage pH and
soluble carbohydrates averaged 3.63 and 100 g/L,
respectively. Addition of xylanase and cellulase showed no
effect (P  0.27) on acetic, lactic, butyric, propionic or
branched-chain fatty acids.
Although treatments did not affect gas losses, the addition
of enzymes linearly increased (P  0.04) effluent and total
fermentative losses (Table 3). In general, every 1 mg/kg of
enzyme increased effluent losses by 0.136 g/kg DM and
0.0272 g/kg fresh matter. However, enzymes had no impact

Table 2. Fermentative profile of sugarcane silage treated with levels of cellulolytic enzymes
Levels of an enzymatic blend of 300 U xylanase and 300 U cellulase/g: 0, 200, 400 and 600 mg/kg fresh matter during sugarcane ensiling.
BCFA, Branched-chain fatty acids (isobutyric, valeric, and isovaleric). s.e.m., Standard error of the mean. For P values: Enz., enzyme effect; linear
and quadratic effect of enzyme

Enzyme level (mg/kg) s.e.m. P-values

0 200 400 600 Enz. Linear Quad.
pH 3.62 3.66 3.60 3.63 0.023 0.41 0.92 0.73
NH3-N (g/kg N) 225 207 223 219 11.7 0.86 0.97 0.67
Soluble carbohydrates (g/L) 106 98.1 98.1 99.4 5.60 0.79 0.50 0.48
Ethanol (g/kg DM) 54.8 57.7 65.9 60.7 3.29 0.74 0.44 0.59
Acetic acid (g/kg DM) 50.7 49.2 51.7 54.8 2.12 0.27 0.24 0.39
Lactic acid (g/kg DM) 41.8 41.7 40.6 43.2 2.08 0.93 0.81 0.64
Butyric acid (mg/kg DM) 178 171 200 167 8.1 0.58 0.96 0.48
Propionic acid (mg/kg DM) 123 118 125 121 6.2 0.93 0.99 0.96
BCFA (mg/kg DM) 62.1 62.2 60.0 62.6 2.26 0.97 0.96 0.75

Table 3. Fermentative losses of sugarcane silage treated with increasing levels of cellulolytic enzymes
Levels of an enzymatic blend of 300 U xylanase and 300 U cellulase/g: 0, 200, 400 and 600 mg/kg fresh matter during sugarcane ensiling. s.e.m., Standard
error of the mean. For P values: Enz., enzyme effect; linear and quadratic effect of enzyme

Enzyme level (mg/kg) s.e.m. P-value

0 200 400 600 Enz. Linear Quad.
Effluent losses
(g/kg DM) 412 411 511 470 33.7 0.03 0.03A 0.45
(g/kg fresh matter) 87.5 86.6 108 98.6 5.12 0.04 0.04B 0.48
Gas losses (g/kg DM) 118 128 127 138 5.8 0.68 0.26 0.99
Dry matter recovery, g/kg 890 878 897 858 15.3 0.81 0.57 0.66
A
Effluent losses = 410 ( 66.0) + 0.136 ( 0.0617)
enzyme level.
B
Effluent losses = 86.9 ( 9.82) + 0.0272 ( 0.0130)
enzyme level.
470 Crop & Pasture Science M. Campana et al.

(P = 0.81) on DM recovery, which averaged 881 g/kg at Discussion

45 days after ensiling. Gas losses were evaluated throughout
the ensiling period, and most of the observed losses occurred
during the 15 firsts days after ensiling (Fig. 1). Moreover, there
were no effects of enzymes (P = 0.79) on gas losses, regardless
(P = 0.79) of evaluation time.
Enzyme level did not affect (P  0.15) silage DM, OM,
NDF, ADF, CP or EE content (Table 4). Silage DM and NDF
averaged 197 g/kg fresh matter and 617 g/kg DM, respectively.
Furthermore, addition of xylanase and cellulase showed
no effect (P  0.15) on DM and NDF degradation, and had
no effect (P = 0.91) on silage pH after aerobic exposure,
regardless (P = 0.97) of evaluation time (Fig. 2). However,
the enzymatic blend quadratically affected (P = 0.02) silage
temperature after aerobic exposure (Fig. 3). The average
temperature of silage after aerobic exposure was 1.028C,
1.228C, 1.028C and 0.638C above environmental temperature
for silos treated with 0, 200, 400 and 600 mg/kg of enzymes,
respectively. This result directly impacted the aerobic stability
period. Enzymes quadratically affected aerobic stability period
(Table 4); the lowest aerobic stability period was calculated
as 250 mg/kg of enzymes.
0 200 400
160
Gas losses (g/kg DM)
During planning of the present study, we choose five cultivars,
intending to provide variability in fresh material composition
that allowed us to extrapolate our results to a sugarcane silage
population (Yang 2010). The ranges of fresh sugarcane
NDF, NFC and in vitro DM degradation were 406–595 and
336–547 g/kg DM, and 533–667 g/kg, respectively. Those
values are similar to many trials evaluating sugarcane ensiling
(Pedroso et al. 2007; Ferreira et al. 2007; Del Valle et al.
2018). The sugarcane evaluated in the present study showed a
low level of DM (range 182–248 g/kg fresh matter), which can
favour the proliferation of butyric acid-producing bacteria,
with intense protein degradation and nutrient losses by
leaching (McDonald et al. 1991) compared with other
traditional crops silages. High fermentation intensity
associated with high moisture content results in a high level
of effluent losses. Effluent losses were almost 3.5 times greater
than gas losses in the present study. Moreover, because we had
0 200 400 600
4.7
Probabilities (P):
4.6 Enz.: 0.91
Time: <0.01
600 4.5
Enz. × time: 0.97
4.4 Linear: 0.53
Silage pH

140 Quad.: 0.74

120 4.3
100 4.2
80 Probabilities (P):
Treat.: 0.79 4.1
60 Time: <0.01
Treat. × time: 0.79 4.0
40 Linear: 0.37
Quad.: 0.82 3.9
20
0 3.8
0 10 20 30 40 50 24 48 72 96 120 144
Days after ensiling Time (hours after aerobic exposure)

Fig. 1. Gas losses throughout the ensiling process of sugarcane silage Fig. 2. Silage pH after aerobic exposure of sugarcane silage treated
treated with increasing levels of a blend of xylanase and cellulose. Values with levels of a blend of xylanase and cellulose Values are the mean
are the mean (n = 10, i.e. replicates)  standard error. (n = 10, i.e. replicates)  standard error.

Table 4. Chemical composition and in vitro degradation of sugarcane silage treated with increasing levels of a blend of cellulolytic enzymes
Levels of an enzymatic blend of 300 U xylanase and 300 U cellulase/g: 0, 200, 400 and 600 mg/kg fresh matter during sugarcane ensiling. s.e.m., Standard
error of the mean. For P values: Enz., enzyme effect; linear and quadratic effect of enzyme

Item Enzyme level (mg/kg) s.e.m. P-value

0 200 400 600 Enz. Linear Quad.
Dry matter (g/kg fresh matter) 198 196 200 192 6.2 0.85 0.63 0.69
Chemical composition (g/kg DM):
Organic matter 971 969 969 968 1.5 0.63 0.21 0.77
Neutral detergent fibre 619 633 607 609 15.2 0.72 0.49 0.72
Acid detergent fibre 547 552 540 552 14.2 0.95 0.93 0.83
Non-fibre carbohydrate 315 295 323 321 16.4 0.73 0.60 0.66
Acid detergent lignin 101 108 105 106 3.1 0.58 0.50 0.46
Crude protein 26.3 28.1 26.9 28.3 1.19 0.38 0.26 0.88
Ether extract 10.7 12.5 11.5 9.91 0.83 0.15 0.33 0.04
In vitro degradation (g/kg):
Dry matter 537 496 498 495 13.6 0.36 0.17 0.34
Neutral detergent fibre 367 334 330 313 15.2 0.50 0.15 0.77
Aerobic stability (h) 60.6 47.3 60.2 62.7 1.84 0.01 0.22 0.03A
A
Aerobic stability = 58.7 ( 3.76) – 4.95
102 ( 2.90
102)
enzyme level + 9.9
105 ( 4.6
105)
(enzyme level)2; minimum level of
enzymes 250 mg/kg.
Fibrolytic enzymes in sugarcane ensiling Crop & Pasture Science 471

0 200 400 600

3.5

Temperature (ºC under evironmental temperature) 3.0 Probabilities (P):

Enz.: 0.02
2.5 Time: <0.01
Enz.× time: 0.76
Linear: 0.02
2.0 Quad.: 0.03

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

−0.5

−1.0
8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96 104 112 120 128 136 144
Time (hours after aerobic exposure)

Fig. 3. Silage temperature after aerobic exposure of sugarcane silage treated with levels of a blend of xylanase and
cellulose. Values are the mean (n = 10, i.e. replicates)  standard error.

an excessive effluent loss, most of the fresh matter (mainly (Lynch et al. 2014). However, Del Valle et al. (2018) found
moisture) was lost as effluent, resulting in a sum of gas losses decreased NDF content and no effects on DM degradation
and DM recovery >1000 g/kg. A lower moisture level favours when an intermediate level (200 mg/kg) of xylanase was
air removal during compaction, improving the fermentation, supplied during ensiling. Those authors used sugarcane with
and reducing gas losses (Hao et al. 2015). higher DM content (mean 277 g/kg fresh matter) and observed
A previous study by our research group observed reduced several effects on the fermentative silage profile.
pH and increased acetic acid concentration when using 200 Fibrolytic enzymes applied during ensiling increase
mg/kg of xylanase in sugarcane ensiling (Del Valle et al. the release of carbohydrates in the silos and aerobic
2018). However, in the present study, fibrolytic enzymes deterioration of silage after aerobic exposure by enhanced
showed no effects on silage fermentation. When evaluating activity of aerobic epiphytic microbes (Jaakkola et al.1991;
fibrolytic enzyme addition to barley and maize silages, Wang Weinberg et al. 1995). In this study, enzymes showed no effect
et al. (2002) observed an increased aerobic bacterial count. on silage pH after aerobic exposure. However, there was a
According to those authors, this effect is linked with enzyme- quadratic effect of enzymes on silage temperature after aerobic
mediated release of reducing sugars from the silage. We agree exposure. Intermediate levels of enzymes (200–250 mg/kg)
that excessive moisture content impaired the effect of enzymes increased temperature and decreased aerobic stability. Dean
on silage fermentation in the present study. It may have et al. (2005) observed increased bermudagrass silage aerobic
lowered the possibility of contact between the enzymes and stability when fibrolytic enzymes were added during ensiling.
the substrate, decreasing their effectiveness. According to those authors, this occurred because enzymes
Increased DM losses can occur when fibrolytic enzymes are tended to promote a homolactic fermentation. Although we
added in high-moisture Napier grass silage (Liu et al. 2016). had hypothesised that fibrolytic enzymes could promote a
Enzyme-mediated plant cell-wall degradation means that heterolactic fermentation in sugarcane silage, and no
intracellular matter is apt to leak and increase effluent significant effect was observed on the fermentation profile,
losses (Zhang and Kumai 2000). Although enzymes showed the effects mentioned by Dean et al. (2005) could have
no impact on silage fermentation, it linearly increased effluent occurred in the present study. On the other hand, we could
losses. Because enzymes showed no significant effect on silage speculate that increased effluent losses made it difficult to
fermentation, they showed no impact on gas fermentative identify differences in fermentative profile and yet contributed
losses and DM recovery. Given that fibrolytic enzymes act to a higher aerobic stability with high enzyme levels.
on cell-wall components, it was hypothesised that increasing Other studies evaluating enzymes during the whole-plant
enzyme levels could reduce fibre content and improve silage maize ensiling show conflicting results on fermentation,
DM degradation. However, enzymes did not affect silage despite lowering the ADF, NDF and hemicellulose contents
chemical composition. Similarly, when evaluating different (Sheperd and Kung 1996). According to Nsereko et al. (2000),
additives during sugarcane ensiling, Ferreira et al. (2007) exogenous enzymes are most effective when applied to feed
reported no positive impact of fibrolytic enzymes on silage before animal ingestion, because some ensiled feeds contain
NDF content and DM degradation, similar that occurring in compounds that are inhibitory to xylanases. Gandra et al.
maize silage (Lynch et al. 2015) and lucerne (alfalfa) silage (2017) observed that fibrolytic enzymes are more effective
472 Crop & Pasture Science
for increasing NDF digestibility in heifers fed with sugarcane
silage than maize silage. Although fibrolytic enzymes can
increase silage digestibility under some circumstances,
positive responses to the application of fibrolytic enzymes
at ensiling would most likely occur with forages low in water-
soluble carbohydrates (Muck et al. 2018) rather than
sugarcane.
Conclusion
Addition of fibrolytic enzymes during sugarcane ensiling
linearly increases effluent losses without affecting DM
recovery. An intermediate level of enzymatic blend
decreased silage aerobic stability. However, xylanase and
cellulose do not affect the fermentative profile, chemical
composition, or in vitro degradation of sugarcane silage.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific funding.
Acknowledgement
The authors thank Luiz Felipe Arjonilla Mattos for organic acid analysis.
References
AOAC (2000) ‘Official methods of analysis.’ 17th edn. (Association of
Official Analytical Chemists: Arlington, VA, USA)
Ávila CLS, Bravo Martins CEC, Schwan RF (2010) Identification and
characterization of yeasts in sugarcane silages. Journal of Applied
Microbiology 109, 1677–1686.
Borreani G, Tabacco E (2010) The relationship of silage temperature with
the microbiological status of the face of corn silage bunkers. Journal of
Dairy Science 93, 2620–2629. doi:10.3168/jds.2009-2919
Cantoia Júnior R, Capucho E, Garcia TM, Del Valle TA, Campana M,
Zilio EMC, Azevedo EB, Morais JPG (2020) Lemongrass essential
oil in sugarcane silage: fermentative profile, losses, chemical
composition, and aerobic stability. Animal Feed Science and
Technology 260, 114371. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2019.114371
Cysneiros CSS, Franco GL, Ulhoa CJ, Diogo JMS, Ramos AKB (2006)
Effect of fibrolytic enzymes on chemical composition of maize silage.
Ciência Animal Brasileira 7, 339–348.
Dean DB, Adesogan AT, Krueger N, Littell RC (2005) Effect of fibrolytic
enzymes on the fermentation characteristics, aerobic stability, and
digestibility of bermudagrass silage. Journal of Dairy Science 88,
994–1003. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)72767-3
Del Valle TA, Antonio G, Zenatti TF, Campana M, Zilio EMC, Ghizzi
LG, Gandra JR, Osório JAC, de Morais JPG (2018) Effects of xylanase
on the fermentation profile and chemical composition of sugarcane
silage. The Journal of Agricultural Science 156, 1123–1129.
doi:10.1017/S0021859618001090
Ferreira DA, Gonçalves LC, Molina LR, Castro Neto AG, Tomich TR
(2007) Fermentation of sugarcane silage treated with urea, zeolita,
bacteria inoculant and bacteria/enzymatic inoculant. Arquivo
Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia 59, 423–433.
doi:10.1590/S0102-09352007000200024
Gandra JR, Miranda GA, Goes RHTB, Takiya CS, Del Valle TA, Oliveira
ER, Freitas JE Jr, Gandra ERS, Araki HMC, Santos ALAV (2017)
Fibrolytic enzyme supplementation through ruminal bolus on eating
behavior, nutrient digestibility and ruminal fermentation in Jersey
heifers fed either corn silage- or sugarcane silage-based diets.
M. Campana et al.
Animal Feed Science and Technology 231, 29–37. doi:10.1016/j.
anifeedsci.2017.06.009
Hao W, Wang HL, Ning TT, Yang FY, Xu CC (2015) Aerobic stability
and effects of yeasts during deterioration of non-fermented and
fermented total mixed ration with different moisture levels. Asian-
Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 28, 816–826. doi:10.5713/
ajas.14.0837
Holden LA (1999) Comparison of methods of in vitro dry matter
digestibility for ten feeds. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 1791–1794.
doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75409-3
Jaakkola S, Huhtanen P, Hissa K (1991) The effect of cell wall degrading
enzymes or formic acid on fermentation quality and on digestion of
grass silage by cattle. Grass and Forage Science 46, 75–87.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-2494.1991.tb02209.x
Jobim CC, Nussio LG, Reis RA, Schmidt P (2007) Methodological
advances in evaluation of preserved forage quality. Revista Brasileira
de Zootecnia 36, 101–119. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982007001000013
Liu QH, Shao T, Bai YF (2016) The effect of fibrolytic enzyme,
Lactobacillus plantarum and two food antioxidants on the
fermentation quality, alpha-tocopherol and beta-carotene of high
moisture napier grass silage ensiled at different temperatures.
Animal Feed Science and Technology 221, 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.
anifeedsci.2016.08.020
Lynch JP, Lin J, Lara EC, Baah J, Beauchemin KA (2014) The effect of
exogenous fibrolytic enzymes and a ferulic acid esterase-producing
inoculant on the fibre degradability, chemical composition and
conservation characteristics of alfalfa silage. Animal Feed Science and
Technology 193, 21–31. doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2014.03.013
Lynch JP, Baah J, Beauchemin KA (2015) Conservation, fiber
digestibility, and nutritive value of corn harvested at 2 cutting
heights and ensiled with fibrolytic enzymes, either alone or with a
ferulic acid esterase-producing inoculant. Journal of Dairy Science
98, 1214–1224. doi:10.3168/jds.2014-8768
Maulfair DD, Fustini M, Heinrichs AJ (2011) Effect of varying total mixed
ration particle size on rumen digesta and fecal particle size and
digestibility in lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 94,
3527–3536. doi:10.3168/jds.2010-3718
McDonald P, Henderson AR, Heron SJE (1991) ‘The biochemistry of
silage.’ 2nd edn. (Chalcomb Publications: Marlow, UK)
McDougall EI (1948) Studies on ruminant saliva. 1. The composition and
output of sheep’s saliva. The Biochemical Journal 43, 99–109.
doi:10.1042/bj0430099
Morgavi DP, Beauchemin KA, Nsereko VL, Rode LM, Iwaasa AD, Yang
WZ, McAllister TA, Wang Y (2000) Synergy between ruminal
fibrolytic enzymes and enzymes from Trichoderma longibrachiatum.
Journal of Dairy Science 83, 1310–1321. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302
(00)74997-6
Muck RE, Nadeau EMG, McAllister TA, Contreras-Govea FE, Santos
MC, Kung L (2018) Silage review: recent advances and future uses
of silage additives. Journal of Dairy Science 101, 3980–4000.
doi:10.3168/jds.2017-13839
Nsereko VL, Morgavi DP, Rode LM, Beauchemin KA, McAllister TA
(2000) Effects of fungal enzyme preparations on hydrolysis and
subsequent degradation of alfalfa hay fiber by mixed rumen
microorganisms in vitro. Animal Feed Science and Technology 88,
153–170. doi:10.1016/S0377-8401(00)00225-X
Pedroso AF, Nussio LG, Loures DRS, Paziani SF, Igarasi MS, Coelho
RM, Horii J, Rodrigues AA (2007) Effect of chemical and bacterial
additives on losses and quality of sugar cane silages. Revista Brasileira
de Zootecnia 36, 558–564. doi:10.1590/S1516-35982007000300006
Pryce JDA (1969) Modification of the Barker-Summerson method for
the determination of lactic acid. The Analyst 94, 1151–1152.
Sheperd AC, Kung L (1996) Effects of an enzyme additive on composition
of corn silage ensiled at various stages of maturity. Journal of Dairy
Science 79, 1767–1773. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(96)76544-X
Fibrolytic enzymes in sugarcane ensiling
Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA (1991) Methods for dietary fiber,
neutral detergent fiber, non-starch polysaccharides in relation to
animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.
doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
Wang Y, McAllister T, Rode L, Beauchemin K, Morgavi D, Victor
Nsereko V, Iwaasa A, Yang W (2002) Effects of exogenous
fibrolytic enzymes on epiphytic microbial populations and in vitro
digestion of silage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 82,
760–768. doi:10.1002/jsfa.1103
Weinberg ZG, Ashbel G, Hen Y, Azrieli A (1995) The effect of cellulase
and hemicellulase on the aerobic stability and fibre analysis of peas
and wheat silages. Animal Feed Science and Technology 55, 287–293.
doi:10.1016/0377-8401(95)00785-L
www.publish.csiro.au/journals/cp
Crop & Pasture Science 473
Yang RC (2010) Towards understanding and use of mixed-model analysis
of agricultural experiments. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 90,
605–627. doi:10.4141/CJPS10049
Zhang J, Kumai S (2000) Effluent and aerobic stability of cellulase and
lab-treated silage of napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum Schum).
Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 13, 1063–1067.
doi:10.5713/ajas.2000.1063
Handling Editor: Tina Acuna