Open Access
Table 5.
The ranking of maize straw silages according to the Flieg-Zimmer scale.
| Maize straw ensilaged |
pH | Volatile fatty acids [%] | Score | Quality according to Flieg-Zimmer scale |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lactic acid |
Acetic acid |
Butyric acid |
||||
| Naturally in ensilage heap | 7.76 | 0.51 | 0.69 | 0.06 | 23 | poor |
| With CSS1 preparation in ensilage heap | 7.35 | 1.05 | 2.6 | 0.14 | 22 | poor |
| With CSS2 preparation in ensilage heap | 7.43 | 0.59 | 2.47 | 0.38 | 8 | low |
| Naturally in film- wrapped bale | 6.06 | 0.17 | 0.20 | 0.24 | 7 | low |
| With CSS1 preparation in film- wrapped bale | 7.96 | 0.08 | 0.31 | 0.13 | 0 | low |
| With CSS2 preparation infilm- wrapped bale | 4.91 | 0.29 | 0.51 | 0.42 | -4 | low |
| Naturallyin flexible silo | 4.07 | 1.12 | 0.67 | 0.02 | 72 | good |
| With CSS1 preparation in flexible silo | 4.39 | 0.87 | 0.23 | 0.03 | 76 | good |
| With CSS2 preparation in flexible silo | 4.52 | 1.07 | 0.68 | 0.03 | 52 | satisfactory |
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.