4.7 Article

Recycling of Citric Acid Waste for Potential Use as Animal Feed through Fermentation with Lactic Acid Bacteria and a Mixture of Fibrolytic Enzymes

期刊

ANIMALS
卷 12, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ani12213049

关键词

waste; improvement; animal feed; environmental impact; recycle

资金

  1. Program on Toxic Substances, Microorganisms and Feed Additives in Livestock and Aquatic Animals for Food Safety, Khon Ken University, Thailand
  2. Graduate Studies, KKU [PD2562-3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to improve the quality of citric acid by-product (CAP) and reduce the crude fiber content in the waste products. By using fibrolytic enzymes and lactic acid bacteria (Lactobacillus casei TH14), the characteristics of CAP were significantly improved. The combination of L. casei TH14 and the enzyme was the most effective strategy to reduce crude fiber and pH, and enhance carbohydrate breakdown.
Simple Summary The by-products have the advantage of being converted into inexpensive animal feed additives, which lowers the cost of animal feed. We hypothesized that citric acid by-product (CAP) might be used for animal feed if sufficient quality improvement occurred, which would lessen environmental impact. We discovered that employing inoculants with fibrolytic enzymes and lactic acid bacteria (Lactobacillus casei TH14) improves the quality of CAP. By reducing the percentage of crude fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and acid detergent fiber at 28 days, this combination is very effective for improving CAP characteristics. Combining L. casei TH14with fibrolytic enzymes is the most efficient strategy to lower crude fiber and pH and improve carbohydrate breakdown. Once improperly managed, the citric acid production industry generates waste, which contributes to pollution and other environmental issues. We proposed that, with sufficient quality improvement, citric acid by-product (CAP) might be used for animal feed, thereby reducing the environmental impact. The aim of the present study was to ferment citric acid by-product (CAP) by inoculation with lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and a fibrolytic enzyme mixture for quality improvement and crude fiber reduction in the waste products. LAB inoculants were L. casei TH14, and the additive enzyme used was a fibrolytic enzyme mixture (glucanase, pectinase, and carboxymethylcellulase) of a small-scale fermentation method. The seven treatments employed in this study were as follows: (1) control (untreated), (2) CAP-inoculated L. casei TH14 at 0.01% DM, (3) CAP-inoculated L. casei TH14 at 0.05% DM, (4) CAP-inoculated enzymes at 0.01% DM, (5) CAP-inoculated enzymes at 0.05% DM, (6) CAP-inoculated L. casei TH14 at 0.01% DM with enzymes at 0.01% DM, and (7) CAP-inoculated L. casei TH14 at 0.05% DM with enzymes at 0.05% DM. The samples were taken on days 1, 7, 14, 21, and 28 of ensiling, both before and after. Four replications were used. The results of the chemical composition of the CAP before and after ensilage inoculated with L. casei TH14 did not show any differences in crude protein, ether extract, ash, or gross energy, but the enzymes significantly (p < 0.05) decreased crude fiber and increased nitrogen-free extract. The combination was especially effective at improving the characteristics of CAP, with a reduction in crude fiber from 21.98% to 22.69%, of neutral detergent fiber (NDF) from 16.01% to 17.54%, and of acid detergent fiber (ADF) from 13.75% to 16.19%. Furthermore, the combination of L. casei TH14 and the enzyme increased crude protein from 1.75% to 2.24% at 28 days of ensiling. Therefore, CAP-inoculated L. casei TH14 did not change in chemical composition, while crude fiber, NDF, and ADF decreased when CAP was inoculated with enzyme. The combination of L. casei TH14 and the enzyme is more effective at improving chemical composition and reducing crude fiber and enhancing carbohydrate breakdown in the CAP. Finally, by enhancing the CAP's quality, it may be possible to use it in animal feed and minimize its impact on the environment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据