4.7 Article

Enhancement of the nutritional value of fermented corn stover as ruminant feed using the fungi Pleurotus spp.

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-90236-0

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Inner Mongolia autonomous region, China [2019BS03023, 2018LH03011]
  2. PhD research startup foundation of Inner Mongolia University for Nationalities [KYQD18053]
  3. Scientific Research Project of Inner Mongolia University for nationalities [NMDYB20032]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Among the four Pleurotus spp. fungi studied, P. sajor-caju and P. eryngii showed better potential in improving the nutritional value of corn stover as ruminant feed. P. citrinopileatus treatment resulted in the highest crude protein content, while P. sajor-caju treatment led to the highest increase in essential amino acids. Overall, P. eryngii and P. sajor-caju enhanced the nutritive value of corn stover as ruminant feed.
Four Pleurotus spp. fungi (P. diamor, P. eryngii, P. sajor-caju, P. citrinopileatus) were compared for their potential to improve nutritional value of corn stover as ruminant feed. Corn stover was inoculated with the fungi under solid-state conditions and their results showed that P. sajor-caju and P. eryngii were better than the other two species of Pleurotus with respect to decreasing the acid detergent lignin (ADL) (8.99 vs 9.88 vs 10.16 vs 10.46). In contrast, P. eryngii had lower ability to degrade cellulose (13.38%). Corn stover treated with P. citrinopileatus had the highest crude protein (CP) content (7.65%), whereas treatment with P. sajor-caju resulted in the highest increase in essential amino acids (55.11%). Although fungal pre-treatment of lignocellulosic biomass does not always result in high-quality feed, overall, P. eryngii and P. sajor-caju improved the nutritive value of corn stover as a ruminant feed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available