Silage is one method of preserving feed or fodder through an ensilage process. Some additives are ordinarily used in the production of silage to improve product quality. This research aimed to evaluate the optimum level of chitosan administration to improve the quality of the total mix ration (TMR) silage. This research was arranged on Completely Randomized Design (CRD) with five treatments and six replications. The treatments are SA (TMR silage with distilled water control, 0% chitosan), SB (TMR silage with 1% acetic acid control, 0% chitosan), SC (TMR silage with 0.5% chitosan diluted in 1% acetic acid), SD (TMR silage with 1% chitosan diluted in 1% acetic acid) and SE (TMR silage with 1.5% chitosan diluted in 1% acetic acid). The variables studied were physical quality, nutrient content, and microbial count of TMR silage. SD treatment (1% chitosan addition) has the highest lactic acid bacteria count among other treatments (P<0.05), without any significant differences in the population of clostridia bacteria (P>0.05). Nevertheless, SE treatment (1.5% chitosan addition) reduce weight loss percentage among other treatment (P<0.05), and enhance nutrient quality and Fleigh point (P<0.05). Chitosan addition to TMR silage improves the quality of chitosan, especially in its nutritional quality and microbial properties. While there is no significant difference of chitosan addition on TMR silage in the physical quality of chitosan. Administration of 1-1.5% chitosan improves the nutritional quality and microbial properties of chitosan, without changing the physical quality of TMR silage.

1.
J.R.
Gandra
,
E.R.
Oliveira
,
C.S.
Takiya
,
R.H.T.B.
Goes
,
P.G.
Paiva
,
K.M.P.
Oliveira
,
E.R.S.
Gandra
,
N.D.
Orbach
, and
H.M.C.
Haraki
,
Chitosan improves the chemical composition, microbiological quality, and aerobic stability of sugarcane silage
,
Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.
214
,
44
52
(
2016
). .
2.
A. Seankamsorn A.
Cherdthong
and
M.
Wanapat
,
Combining crude glycerin with chitosan can manipulate in vitro ruminal efficiency and inhibit methane synthesis
,
Animals
10
(
37
),
1
13
(
2019
). doi:.
3.
S.
Liu
,
J.
Sun
,
L.
Yu
,
C.
Zhang
,
J.
Bi
,
F.
Zhu
,
M.
Qu
,
C.
Jiang
, and
Q.
Yang
,
Extraction and characterization of chitin from the beetle Holotrichia parallela motschulsky
,
Molecules
17
(
4
),
4604
4611
(
2012
). .
4.
N.H.
Marei
,
E.A.
El-Samie
,
T.
Salah
,
G.R.
Saad
, and
A.H.M.
Elwahy
,
Isolation and characterization of chitosan from different local insects in Egypt
,
Int. J. Biol. Macromol.
82
,
871
877
(
2016
). .
5.
R.
Jiménez-Ocampo
,
S.
Valencia-Salazar
,
C.E.
Pinzón-Díaz
,
E.
Herrera-Torres
,
C.F.
Aguilar-Pérez
,
J.
Arango
, and
J.C.
Ku-Vera
,
The role of chitosan as a possible agent for enteric methane mitigation in ruminants
,
Animals
9
(
11
),
1
12
(
2019
). .
6.
M.
Kaya
,
E.
Lelešius
,
R.
Nagrockaite
,
I.
Sargin
,
G.
Arslan
,
A.
Mol
,
T.
Baran
,
E.
Can
, and
B.
Bitim
,
Differentiations of chitin content and surface morphologies of chitins extracted from male and female grasshopper species
,
LoS One
10
(
1
),
e0115531
(
2015
). .
7.
A.S.
Anggraeni
,
A.
Jayanegara
,
E.B.
Laconi
,
N.R.
Kumalasari
, and
A.
Sofyan
,
Marine by-products and insects as a potential chitosan source for ruminant feed additives
,
Czech J. Anim. Sci.
67
(
8
),
295
317
(
2022
). .
8.
P.
Beaney
,
J.
Lizardi-Mendoza
, and
M.
Healy
,
Comparison of chitins produced by chemical and bioprocessing methods
,
J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol.
80
(
2
),
145
150
(
2005
). .
9.
H.
El Knidri
,
R.
El Khalfaouy
,
A.
Laajeb
,
A.
Addaou
, and
A.
Lahsini
,
Eco-friendly extraction and characterization of chitin and chitosan from the shrimp shell waste via microwave irradiation
,
Process Saf. Environ. Prot.
104
,
395
405
(
2016
). .
10.
Y.N.
Tan
,
P.P.
Lee
, and
W.N.
Chen
,
Microbial extraction of chitin from seafood waste using sugars derived from fruit waste-stream
,
AMB Express
10
(
1
),
1
22
(
2020
). .
11.
W.
Arbia
,
L.
Arbia
,
L.
Adour
, and
A.
Amrane
,
Chitin extraction from crustacean shells using biological methods–A Review, Food Technol
,
Biotechnol
51
(
1
),
12
25
(
2013
).
12.
M.
Anwar
,
A.S.
Anggraeni
, and
M.H.
Al Amin
,
Comparison of green method for chitin deacetylation
,
AIP Conf. Proc.
1823
(
2017
).
13.
T.A.
Del Valle
,
T.F.Z.G.
Antonio
, and
M.C.J.R.
Gandra
,
Effect of chitosan on the preservation quality of sugarcane silage
,
Grass Forage Sci.
April,
1
9
(
2018
). .
14.
M.
Kaya
,
T.
Baran
,
S.
Erdoʇan
,
A.
Menteş
,
M.
Aşan
Özüsaʇlam
, and
Y.S.
Çakmak
,
Physicochemical comparison of chitin and chitosan obtained from larvae and adult Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata
),
Mater. Sci. Eng. C
45
,
72
81
(
2014
). .
15.
L.J.
Kung
,
R.D.
Shaver
,
R.J.
Grant
, and
R.J.
Schmidt
,
Silage review: Interpretation of chemical, microbial, and organoleptic components of silages
,
J. Dairy Sci.
101
,
4020
4033
(
2018
). .
16.
T.O.
Ososanya
and
O.A.
Olorunnisomo
,
Silage characteristics and preference of sheep for wet brewer’s grain ensiled with maize cob
,
Livest. Res. Rural Dev.
27
,
5
9
(
2015
). lrrd.cipav.org.co/lrrd27/1/osos27012.htm.
17.
[AOAC]
. Association of Official Analytical Chemistry International,
Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC INTERNATIONAL
(
2005
). (
Washington DC, USA
:
Association of Official Analysis Chemist
).
18.
P.J.
Van Soest
,
J.B.
Robertson
, and
B.A.
Lewis
,
Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition
,
J. Dairy Sci.
74
(
10
),
3583
(
1991
). .
19.
A.
Sofyan
,
L.M.
Yusiati
,
Y.
Widyastuti
, and
R.
Utomo
,
Microbiological characteristic and fermentability of king grass (Pennisetum hybrid) silage treated by lactic acid bacteria-yeast inoculants consortium combined with rice bran addition
,
J. Indones. Trop. Anim. Agric.
36
(
4
),
265
272
(
2011
). .
20.
E.R.
Sanders
,
Aseptic laboratory techniques: Plating methods
,
J. Vis. Exp.
63
,
1
18
(
2012
). .
21.
M.
Miralestari
,
A.
Sudarman
,
S.
Suharti
, and
A.
Sofyan
,
Enhancing physicalchemical quality and palatability of king grass (Pennisetum hybrid) silage treated by combination of water soluble carbohydrate and legume sources
,
Icest 2018
:
270
275
(
2021
).
22.
D.
Raafat
and
H.G.
Sahl
,
Chitosan and its antimicrobial potential-A critical literature survey
,
Microb. Biotechnol.
2
(
2
),
186
201
(
2009
). .
23.
J.R.
Gandra
,
C.S.
Takiya
,
T.A.
Del Valle
,
E.R.
Oliveira
,
R.H.T.B.
De Goes
, and
E.R.S.
Gandra
,
Soybean whole-plant ensiled with chitosan and lactic acid bacteria: Microorganism counts, fermentative profile, and total losses
,
J. Dairy Sci.
101
(
9
),
7871
7880
(
2018
) .
24.
S.
Sirakaya
and
S.B.
Beyzi
,
Treatment of alfalfa silage with chitosan at different levels to determine chemical, nutritional, fermentation, and microbial parameters
,
J. Anim. Feed Sci.
31
(
1
),
73
80
(
2022
). .
25.
T.A.D.
Valle
,
G.
Antonio
,
E.M.D.C.
Zilio
,
M.
Sérgio
,
J.R.
Gandra
,
F.A.B.
De Castro
,
M.
Campana
,
J.
Prudêncio
, and
G.
De Morais
,
Chitosan level effects on fermentation profile and chemical composition of sugarcane silage, Braz J Vet Res Anim Sci.
57
(
3
),
1
7
(
2020
).
26.
M.
Yadav
,
P.
Goswami
,
K.
Paritosh
,
M.
Kumar
,
N.
Pareek
, and
V.
Vivekanand
,
Seafood waste: a source for preparation of commercially employable chitin/chitosan materials
,
Bioresour. Bioprocess.
6
(
1
),
1
20
(
2019
). .
27.
R.C.
Goy
,
D.
De Britto
, and
O.B.G.
Assis
,
A review of the antimicrobial activity of chitosan
,
Polimeros
19
(
3
),
241
247
(
2009
). .
28.
M.G.
Ribeiro
,
K.A.D.P.
Costa
,
W.F.
de Souza
,
W.S.
Cruvinel
,
J.T.
da Silva
, and
D.R.
dos Santos Júnior
,
Silage quality of sorghum and Urochloa brizantha cultivars monocropped or intercropped in different planting systems
,
Acta Sci. Anim. Sci.
39
(
3
),
243
(
2017
). .
29.
J.P.G.
De Morais
,
R. Cantoia
Júnior
,
T.M.
Garcia
,
E.
Capucho
,
M.
Campana
,
J.R.
Gandra
,
L.G.
Ghizzi
, and
T.A.
Del Valle
,
Chitosan and microbial inoculants in whole plant soybean silage
,
J. Agric. Sci.
159
(
3-4
),
227
235
(
2021
). .
30.
H.K.
No
,
N.
Young
,
S.
Ho
, and
S.P.
Meyers
,
Antibacterial activity of chitosans and chitosan oligomers with different molecular weights
,
Int. J. Food Microbiol.
74
,
65
72
(
2002
). .
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.