Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Mısır ve Soya Fasulyesi Karışımlarının Silaj Mikroorganizma Dinamiği, Fermentasyon Profili ve Kalitesi Üzerindeki Etkileri

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 29 Sayı: 1, 118 - 127

Fatma Akbay , Tuğba Günaydın , Mustafa Kızılsımsek

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.1699600

Öz

Bu çalışma, Doğu Akdeniz koşullarında mısır ve soya fasulyesinin farklı karışım oranlarının silajın fermentasyon profili ve besin değeri üzerindeki etkileri ve silaj parametreleri arasındaki ilişkiyi inceleyen bir araştırmadır. Mısır (M) ve Soya (S) bitkileri, %100M:0S, %75M:%25S, %50M:%50S, %25M:%75S ve %0M:%100S oranlarında karıştırılarak silolanmıştır. Fermentasyonun 60. gününün sonunda silajlar açılmış ve fermentasyon özellikleri ile kalite parametreleri analiz edilmiştir. Sonuçlar, silajda artan mısır oranının laktik asit (LA) miktarını artırdığını ve pH seviyesini düşürdüğünü göstermiştir. Propiyonik asit ve asetik asit içerikleri, saf soya fasulyesi (%100S) ve %25M:%75S oranındaki karışım silajlarında daha yüksek bulunmuştur. Mısır silajının, yüksek düzeyde suda çözünebilir karbonhidrat (WSC) içeriğine sahipken; soya fasulyesi silajının belirgin şekilde daha yüksek ham protein (HP) içeriğine sahip olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Mısır–soya karışımı silajlar, saf mısır silajına kıyasla ham protein içeriğini artırırken, nötr deterjan lifi (NDF), asit deterjan lif (ADF) ve asit deterjan lignin (ADL) içeriklerini azaltmıştır. Soya fasulyesinin %25 ila %50 oranlarında karışıma dahil edilmesiyle silajlarının kalite özelliklerinin iyileştirilebileceği belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Fermantasyon Karışım oranı Mısır Protein içeriği Silaj kalitesi

Kaynakça

  • AOAC (1990). Official Methods of Analysis (15th ed., Vol. I). Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA.
  • Arslan, M., Erdurmuş, C., Öten, M., Aydınoğlu, B., & Çakmakçı, S. (2016). Determination of nutritive value of maize silages ensiled with soybean at different rate. Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 31, 417–422. https://doi.org/10.7161/omuanajas.269996
  • Baghdadi, A., Halim, R. A., Daghigh, A. G., & Sakimin, S. Z. (2016). Crop plantıng proportıons effects on sılage volatıle fatty acıds of corn and legume. 2nd International and 14th National Iranian Crop Science Congress. At: University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
  • Baghdadi, A., Halim, R. A., Radziah, O., Martini, M. Y., & Ebrahimi, M. (2016). Fermentation characteristics and nutritive value of maize silage intercropped with soybean under different crop combination ratios. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 26(6), 1710–1717.
  • Batista, V. V., Adami, P. F., Moraes, P. V. D., Oligini, K. F., Giacomel, C. L., & Link, L. (2019). Row arrangements of maize and soybean intercrop on silage quality and grain yield. Journal of Agricultural Science, 11(2), 286–300. https://doi.org/10.5539/jas.v11n2p286
  • Bolson, D. C., Jacovaci, F. A., Gritti, V. C., Bueno, A. V. I., Daniel, J. L. P., Nussio, L. G., & Jobim, C. C. (2022). Intercropped maize‐soybean silage: Effects on forage yield, fermentation pattern and nutritional composition. Grassland Science, 68(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/grs.12323
  • Canbolat, Ö., Kalkan, H., & Filya, İ. (2013). The use of honey locust pods as a silage additive for alfalfa forage. Journal of Kafkas University Veterinary Faculty, 19(2), 291–297. https://doi.org/10.9775/kvfd.2012.7710
  • Ciftci, B., Kaplan, M., Akcura, M., & Buyukkilic Beyzi, S. (2023). Assessment of nutritive value, gas and methane production, fermentation of ensiled mixtures of sorghum–cluster bean. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 51(1), 123-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/09712119.2023.2165087
  • Dahmardeh, M., Ghanbari, A., Syasar, B., & Ramroudi, M. (2009). Effect of intercropping maize (Zea mays L.) with cow pea (Vigna unguiculata L.) on green forage yield and quality evaluation. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences, 8(3), 235–239.
  • De Moura Zanine, A., de Sene, O. A., Ferreira, D. J., Parente, H. N., Parente, M. O. M., Pinho, R. M. A., & Bandeira, D. M. (2020). Fermentative profile, losses and chemical composition of silage soybean genotypes amended with sugarcane levels. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 21064.
  • Demirel, M., Celik, S., Temur, C., Güney, M., & Celik, S. (2009) Determination of fermentation properties and digestibility characteristics of combination of maize-soybean and maize silages. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 8:711-714.
  • Deriaz, R. E. (1961). Routine analysis of carbohydrates and lignin in herbage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 12, 152–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740120210
  • Deriaz, R. E. (1961). Routine analysis of carbohydrates and lignin in herbage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 12, 152–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740120210
  • Garay-Martínez, J. R., Godina-Rodríguez, J. E., Maldonado-Jáquez, J. A., Lucio-Ruíz, F., Joaquín-Cancino, S., Bautista-Martínez, Y., & Granados-Rivera, L. D. (2024). Nutritive value of maize and soybean silages at different ratio in a subtropical climate condition. Chilean journal of agricultural research, 84(4), 540-547. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/s0718-58392024000400540
  • Geren, H., Avcioglu, R., Soya, H., & Kir, B. (2008). Intercropping of maize with cowpea and bean: Biomass yield and silage quality. African Journal of Biotechnology, 7(22), 4100–4104.
  • Ghanbarzadeh, S., Chaichi, M. R., Hosseini, S. M. B., & Sadeghpour, A. (2010). Evaluation of nitrogen fertilizer and plant density on chemical analysis of maize forage and weed population in an agroforestry system. Asian Journal of Chemistry, 22, 2387–2397.
  • Hassen, A., Talore, D. G., Tesfamariam, E. H., Friend, M. A., & Mpanza, T. D. E. (2017). Potential use of forage-legume intercropping technologies to adapt to climate-change impacts on mixed crop-livestock systems in Africa: A review. Regional Environmental Change, 17, 1713–1724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1131-7
  • Homan, E. (2016). Determination feed yield and silage quality of different ratios intercropping mixtures of maize-soybean crops in Mardin ecological conditions [M.Sc. Thesis, Field Crops Department].
  • Jahanzad, E., Sadeghpour, A., Hashemi, M., Afshar, R., Hosseini, M. B., & Barker, A. (2016). Silage fermentation profile, chemical composition and economic evaluation of millet and soya bean grown in monocultures and as intercrops. Grass and Forage Science, 71, 584–594. https://doi.org/10.1111/gfs.12216
  • Jahanzad, E., Sadeghpour, A., Hosseini, M. B., Barker, A. V., Hashemi, M., & Zandvakili, O. R. (2014). Silage yield and nutritive value of millet-soybean intercrops as influenced by nitrogen application. Agronomy Journal, 106(6), 1993–2000. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj13.0542
  • Jin, S., Tahir, M., Huang, F., Wang, T., Li, H., Shi, W., & Zhong, J. (2024). Fermentation quality, amino acids profile, and microbial communities of whole-plant soybean silage in response to Lactiplantibacillus plantarum B90 alone or in combination with functional microbes. Frontiers in Microbiology, 15, 1458287. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1458287
  • Kızılşimşek, M., Günaydın, T., Aslan, A., Keklik, K., & Açıkgöz, H. (2020). Improving silage feed quality of maize intercropped with some legumes. Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences, 7(1), 165–169. https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.680048
  • Kızılşimşek, M., Ozturk, C., Yanar, K., Ertekin, I., Ozkan, C. O., & Kamalak, A. (2017). Associative effects of ensiling soybean and corn plant as mixtures on the nutritive value, fermentation and methane emission. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 26(10), 5754–5760.
  • Kung Jr, L., Shaver, R. D., Grant, R. J., & Schmidt, R. J. (2018). Silage review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial, and organoleptic components of silages. Journal of Dairy Science, 101(5), 4020–4033. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13909
  • Kung Jr, L., Shaver, R. D., Grant, R. J., & Schmidt, R. J. (2018). Silage review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial, and organoleptic components of silages. Journal of dairy Science, 101(5), 4020-4033. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13909
  • McDonald, P., Henderson, A. R., & Heron, S. J. E. (1991). The biochemistry of silage (2nd ed.). Marlow, UK: Chalcombe Publications.
  • Muck, R. (2013). Recent advances in silage microbiology. Agricultural and Food Science, 22(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.23986/afsci.6718
  • Muck, R. E., Nadeau, E. M. G., McAllister, T. A., Contreras-Govea, F. E., Santos, M. C., & Kung, L. (2018). Silage review: Recent advances and future uses of silages additives. Journal of Dairy Science, 101, 3980–4000. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13839
  • Ni, K., Wang, F., Zhu, B., Yang, J., Zhou, G., Pan, Y., Tao, Y., & Zhong, J. (2017). Effects of lactic acid bacteria and molasses additives on the microbial community and fermentation quality of soybean silage. Bioresource Technology, 238, 706–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.04.055
  • Özaslan Parlak, A., & Alaca, B. (2017). The effect of maize and sorghum-sudangrass crosses intercropped with soybean, cowpea, guar on silage yield and quality. COMU Journal of Agriculture Faculty, 5(1), 99–104.
  • Parra, C. S., Bolson, D. C., Jacovaci, F. A., Nussio, L. G., Jobim, C. C., & Daniel, J. L. P. (2019). Influence of soybean-crop proportion on the conservation of maize-soybean bi-crop silage. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 257, 114295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2019.114295
  • Qu, Y., Jiang, W., Yin, G., Wei, C., & Bao, J. (2013). Effects of feeding maize-lablab bean mixture silages on nutrient apparent digestibility and performance of dairy cows. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 26(4), 509. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2012.12531
  • Smith, S. (2000). Growing maize with companion crop legumes for high protein silage. Greenbook Energy and Sustainable Agriculture Program, Minnesota Department of Agriculture, USA, pp. 68–70.
  • Soe Htet, M. N., Hai, J. B., Bo, P. T., Gong, X. W., Liu, C. J., Dang, K., & Feng, B. L. (2021). Evaluation of nutritive values through comparison of forage yield and silage quality of mono-cropped and intercropped maize-soybean harvested at two maturity stages. Agriculture, 11(5), 452. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11050452
  • Soe Htet, M. N., Wang, H., Yadav, V., Sompouviseth, T., & Feng, B. (2022). Legume integration augments the forage productivity and quality in maize-based system in the Loess Plateau region. Sustainability, 14(10), 6022. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106022
  • Tres, T. T., Jobim, C. C., Rossi, R. M., Bueno, A. I., & Gritti, V. C. (2020). Evaluation of rehydrated corn grain silage with okara or soybean inclusion in the performance of lactating cows. Semina: Ciências Agrárias, Londrina, 41 (6)2747-2758. https://doi.org/110.5433/1679-0359.2020v41n6p2747
  • Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B., & Lewis, B. A. (1991). Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74, 3583–3597. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
  • Yang, M., Wang, F., Xu, W., Li, X., Yin, H., Tuluhong, M., & Cui, G. (2024). Effects of the fermentation quality and microbial community of waxy maize mixed with fodder soybean silage. Frontiers in Microbiology, 15, 1405018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1405018
  • Zeng, T., Li, X., Guan, H., Yang, W., Liu, W., Liu, J., & Yan, Y. (2020). Dynamic microbial diversity and fermentation quality of the mixed silage of maize and soybean grown in strip intercropping system. Bioresource Technology, 313, 123655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123655
  • Zeng, T., Wu, Y., Xin, Y., Chen, C., Du, Z., Li, X., & Yan, Y. (2022). Silage quality and output of different maize–soybean strip intercropping patterns. Fermentation, 8(4), 174. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation8040174

Effect of Maize and Soybean Mixtures on Microorganism Dynamic, Fermentation Profile and Quality of Silage Feed

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 29 Sayı: 1, 118 - 127

Fatma Akbay , Tuğba Günaydın , Mustafa Kızılsımsek

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.1699600

Öz

This study investigates the effects of different mixture ratios of maize and soybean on the fermentation profile and nutritional quality of silage under Eastern Mediterranean conditions, as well as the relationship between silage parameters. The 5 mixture rates (100M:0S, 75M:25S, 50M:50S, 25M:75S, and 0M:100S) of Maize (M) and Soybean (S) were prepared for ensiling. After 60 days of fermentation, silages were opened and analyzed for fermentation profile and other quality characteristics. The results showed that increasing the maize proportion in silage led to an increase in lactic acid (LA) and a decrease in pH level. Propionic acid and acetic acid content were higher in sole soybean and 25M:75S silage than in sole maize silage and other mixture rations. Maize silage had considerably higher water-soluble carbohydrate (WSC) content than soybean silage, while soybean had significantly higher protein content than that of maize. Maize-soybean mixture increased crude protein content and reduced neutral detergent fibre (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF), and acid detergent lignin (ADL) content in silage compared to sole crop maize silage. The silage quality of maize+soybean mixture can be improved with inclusion levels of soybean from 25% to 50%.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Fermentation Maize Mixture ratio Protein content Silage quality

Kaynakça

  • AOAC (1990). Official Methods of Analysis (15th ed., Vol. I). Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA.
  • Arslan, M., Erdurmuş, C., Öten, M., Aydınoğlu, B., & Çakmakçı, S. (2016). Determination of nutritive value of maize silages ensiled with soybean at different rate. Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 31, 417–422. https://doi.org/10.7161/omuanajas.269996
  • Baghdadi, A., Halim, R. A., Daghigh, A. G., & Sakimin, S. Z. (2016). Crop plantıng proportıons effects on sılage volatıle fatty acıds of corn and legume. 2nd International and 14th National Iranian Crop Science Congress. At: University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
  • Baghdadi, A., Halim, R. A., Radziah, O., Martini, M. Y., & Ebrahimi, M. (2016). Fermentation characteristics and nutritive value of maize silage intercropped with soybean under different crop combination ratios. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 26(6), 1710–1717.
  • Batista, V. V., Adami, P. F., Moraes, P. V. D., Oligini, K. F., Giacomel, C. L., & Link, L. (2019). Row arrangements of maize and soybean intercrop on silage quality and grain yield. Journal of Agricultural Science, 11(2), 286–300. https://doi.org/10.5539/jas.v11n2p286
  • Bolson, D. C., Jacovaci, F. A., Gritti, V. C., Bueno, A. V. I., Daniel, J. L. P., Nussio, L. G., & Jobim, C. C. (2022). Intercropped maize‐soybean silage: Effects on forage yield, fermentation pattern and nutritional composition. Grassland Science, 68(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/grs.12323
  • Canbolat, Ö., Kalkan, H., & Filya, İ. (2013). The use of honey locust pods as a silage additive for alfalfa forage. Journal of Kafkas University Veterinary Faculty, 19(2), 291–297. https://doi.org/10.9775/kvfd.2012.7710
  • Ciftci, B., Kaplan, M., Akcura, M., & Buyukkilic Beyzi, S. (2023). Assessment of nutritive value, gas and methane production, fermentation of ensiled mixtures of sorghum–cluster bean. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 51(1), 123-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/09712119.2023.2165087
  • Dahmardeh, M., Ghanbari, A., Syasar, B., & Ramroudi, M. (2009). Effect of intercropping maize (Zea mays L.) with cow pea (Vigna unguiculata L.) on green forage yield and quality evaluation. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences, 8(3), 235–239.
  • De Moura Zanine, A., de Sene, O. A., Ferreira, D. J., Parente, H. N., Parente, M. O. M., Pinho, R. M. A., & Bandeira, D. M. (2020). Fermentative profile, losses and chemical composition of silage soybean genotypes amended with sugarcane levels. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 21064.
  • Demirel, M., Celik, S., Temur, C., Güney, M., & Celik, S. (2009) Determination of fermentation properties and digestibility characteristics of combination of maize-soybean and maize silages. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 8:711-714.
  • Deriaz, R. E. (1961). Routine analysis of carbohydrates and lignin in herbage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 12, 152–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740120210
  • Deriaz, R. E. (1961). Routine analysis of carbohydrates and lignin in herbage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 12, 152–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740120210
  • Garay-Martínez, J. R., Godina-Rodríguez, J. E., Maldonado-Jáquez, J. A., Lucio-Ruíz, F., Joaquín-Cancino, S., Bautista-Martínez, Y., & Granados-Rivera, L. D. (2024). Nutritive value of maize and soybean silages at different ratio in a subtropical climate condition. Chilean journal of agricultural research, 84(4), 540-547. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/s0718-58392024000400540
  • Geren, H., Avcioglu, R., Soya, H., & Kir, B. (2008). Intercropping of maize with cowpea and bean: Biomass yield and silage quality. African Journal of Biotechnology, 7(22), 4100–4104.
  • Ghanbarzadeh, S., Chaichi, M. R., Hosseini, S. M. B., & Sadeghpour, A. (2010). Evaluation of nitrogen fertilizer and plant density on chemical analysis of maize forage and weed population in an agroforestry system. Asian Journal of Chemistry, 22, 2387–2397.
  • Hassen, A., Talore, D. G., Tesfamariam, E. H., Friend, M. A., & Mpanza, T. D. E. (2017). Potential use of forage-legume intercropping technologies to adapt to climate-change impacts on mixed crop-livestock systems in Africa: A review. Regional Environmental Change, 17, 1713–1724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1131-7
  • Homan, E. (2016). Determination feed yield and silage quality of different ratios intercropping mixtures of maize-soybean crops in Mardin ecological conditions [M.Sc. Thesis, Field Crops Department].
  • Jahanzad, E., Sadeghpour, A., Hashemi, M., Afshar, R., Hosseini, M. B., & Barker, A. (2016). Silage fermentation profile, chemical composition and economic evaluation of millet and soya bean grown in monocultures and as intercrops. Grass and Forage Science, 71, 584–594. https://doi.org/10.1111/gfs.12216
  • Jahanzad, E., Sadeghpour, A., Hosseini, M. B., Barker, A. V., Hashemi, M., & Zandvakili, O. R. (2014). Silage yield and nutritive value of millet-soybean intercrops as influenced by nitrogen application. Agronomy Journal, 106(6), 1993–2000. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj13.0542
  • Jin, S., Tahir, M., Huang, F., Wang, T., Li, H., Shi, W., & Zhong, J. (2024). Fermentation quality, amino acids profile, and microbial communities of whole-plant soybean silage in response to Lactiplantibacillus plantarum B90 alone or in combination with functional microbes. Frontiers in Microbiology, 15, 1458287. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1458287
  • Kızılşimşek, M., Günaydın, T., Aslan, A., Keklik, K., & Açıkgöz, H. (2020). Improving silage feed quality of maize intercropped with some legumes. Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences, 7(1), 165–169. https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.680048
  • Kızılşimşek, M., Ozturk, C., Yanar, K., Ertekin, I., Ozkan, C. O., & Kamalak, A. (2017). Associative effects of ensiling soybean and corn plant as mixtures on the nutritive value, fermentation and methane emission. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 26(10), 5754–5760.
  • Kung Jr, L., Shaver, R. D., Grant, R. J., & Schmidt, R. J. (2018). Silage review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial, and organoleptic components of silages. Journal of Dairy Science, 101(5), 4020–4033. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13909
  • Kung Jr, L., Shaver, R. D., Grant, R. J., & Schmidt, R. J. (2018). Silage review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial, and organoleptic components of silages. Journal of dairy Science, 101(5), 4020-4033. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13909
  • McDonald, P., Henderson, A. R., & Heron, S. J. E. (1991). The biochemistry of silage (2nd ed.). Marlow, UK: Chalcombe Publications.
  • Muck, R. (2013). Recent advances in silage microbiology. Agricultural and Food Science, 22(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.23986/afsci.6718
  • Muck, R. E., Nadeau, E. M. G., McAllister, T. A., Contreras-Govea, F. E., Santos, M. C., & Kung, L. (2018). Silage review: Recent advances and future uses of silages additives. Journal of Dairy Science, 101, 3980–4000. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13839
  • Ni, K., Wang, F., Zhu, B., Yang, J., Zhou, G., Pan, Y., Tao, Y., & Zhong, J. (2017). Effects of lactic acid bacteria and molasses additives on the microbial community and fermentation quality of soybean silage. Bioresource Technology, 238, 706–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.04.055
  • Özaslan Parlak, A., & Alaca, B. (2017). The effect of maize and sorghum-sudangrass crosses intercropped with soybean, cowpea, guar on silage yield and quality. COMU Journal of Agriculture Faculty, 5(1), 99–104.
  • Parra, C. S., Bolson, D. C., Jacovaci, F. A., Nussio, L. G., Jobim, C. C., & Daniel, J. L. P. (2019). Influence of soybean-crop proportion on the conservation of maize-soybean bi-crop silage. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 257, 114295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2019.114295
  • Qu, Y., Jiang, W., Yin, G., Wei, C., & Bao, J. (2013). Effects of feeding maize-lablab bean mixture silages on nutrient apparent digestibility and performance of dairy cows. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 26(4), 509. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2012.12531
  • Smith, S. (2000). Growing maize with companion crop legumes for high protein silage. Greenbook Energy and Sustainable Agriculture Program, Minnesota Department of Agriculture, USA, pp. 68–70.
  • Soe Htet, M. N., Hai, J. B., Bo, P. T., Gong, X. W., Liu, C. J., Dang, K., & Feng, B. L. (2021). Evaluation of nutritive values through comparison of forage yield and silage quality of mono-cropped and intercropped maize-soybean harvested at two maturity stages. Agriculture, 11(5), 452. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11050452
  • Soe Htet, M. N., Wang, H., Yadav, V., Sompouviseth, T., & Feng, B. (2022). Legume integration augments the forage productivity and quality in maize-based system in the Loess Plateau region. Sustainability, 14(10), 6022. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106022
  • Tres, T. T., Jobim, C. C., Rossi, R. M., Bueno, A. I., & Gritti, V. C. (2020). Evaluation of rehydrated corn grain silage with okara or soybean inclusion in the performance of lactating cows. Semina: Ciências Agrárias, Londrina, 41 (6)2747-2758. https://doi.org/110.5433/1679-0359.2020v41n6p2747
  • Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B., & Lewis, B. A. (1991). Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74, 3583–3597. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
  • Yang, M., Wang, F., Xu, W., Li, X., Yin, H., Tuluhong, M., & Cui, G. (2024). Effects of the fermentation quality and microbial community of waxy maize mixed with fodder soybean silage. Frontiers in Microbiology, 15, 1405018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1405018
  • Zeng, T., Li, X., Guan, H., Yang, W., Liu, W., Liu, J., & Yan, Y. (2020). Dynamic microbial diversity and fermentation quality of the mixed silage of maize and soybean grown in strip intercropping system. Bioresource Technology, 313, 123655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123655
  • Zeng, T., Wu, Y., Xin, Y., Chen, C., Du, Z., Li, X., & Yan, Y. (2022). Silage quality and output of different maize–soybean strip intercropping patterns. Fermentation, 8(4), 174. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation8040174
Toplam 40 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Çayır-Mera ve Yem Bitkileri
Bölüm ARAŞTIRMA MAKALESİ (Research Article)
Yazarlar

Fatma Akbay 0000-0002-0156-9974

Tuğba Günaydın 0000-0002-4458-1287

Mustafa Kızılsımsek 0000-0002-0295-0603

Erken Görünüm Tarihi 18 Ekim 2025
Yayımlanma Tarihi 21 Ekim 2025
Gönderilme Tarihi 15 Mayıs 2025
Kabul Tarihi 15 Ağustos 2025
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2026 Cilt: 29 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Akbay, F., Günaydın, T., & Kızılsımsek, M. (2025). Effect of Maize and Soybean Mixtures on Microorganism Dynamic, Fermentation Profile and Quality of Silage Feed. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi, 29(1), 118-127. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.1699600
 Kapak Resmi İndir

21082



2022-JIF = 0.500

2022-JCI = 0.170

Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi (International Peer Reviewed Journal)

       Dergimiz, herhangi bir başvuru veya yayımlama ücreti almamaktadır. (Free submission and publication)

      Yılda 6 sayı yayınlanır. (Published 6 times a year)


88x31.png 

Bu web sitesi Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

                 


Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
e-ISSN: 2619-9149