Biological ensilage additives as pretreatment for maize to increase the biogas production.

Several biological ensilage additives were tested on maize substrate for their effect on biogas production and preservation of ODM content. In general, the addition of some biological additives and subsequent storage for 7 weeks could enhance the biogas and biomethane production per ODM when compared to the untreated sample. A common microbial inoculent containing homo-fermentative and hetero-fermentative bacteria (Bonsilage Mais®), had no beneficial effect on biogas and biomethane production compared with the non-treated sample (−12.7% and −13.1% per ODM, respectively). More complex additives with hetero- and homo-fermentative activity (Silasil Energy®) as well as enzymes (Sil-all 4×4®) or bacteria and yeasts (Microferm®) did effectively increase the biogas production per ODM (respectively with 11.8, 10.1 and 14.7%). Losses in ODM content were minor in all samples. These results might indicate that more divergent biological additives involving yeasts or enzymes during ensiling are preferred as maize preservation tools for anaerobic digestion instead of a spontaneous ensilage population or to add only homo- and hetero-fermentative strains. The nature of the additive might enhance the hydrolysis step in the anaerobic digestion process by decomposing complex carbohydrate structures.

[1]  M. Bhat,et al.  In vitro evaluation of fibrolytic enzymes as additives for maize (Zea mays L.) silage: I. Effects of ensiling temperature, enzyme source and addition level , 2004 .

[2]  M. Fraser,et al.  The effect of harvest date and inoculation on the yield, fermentation characteristics and feeding value of forage pea and field bean silages , 2001 .

[3]  Z. Tan,et al.  Effects of cellulase or lactic acid bacteria on silage fermentation and in vitro gas production of several morphological fractions of maize stover , 2009 .

[4]  W. Zollitsch,et al.  Biogas production from maize and dairy cattle manure - influence of biomass composition on the methane yield. , 2007 .

[5]  Siegfried Schittenhelm,et al.  Chemical composition and methane yield of maize hybrids with contrasting maturity. , 2008 .

[6]  L. Kung,et al.  Effect of Lactobacillus buchneri 40788 on the fermentation, aerobic stability and nutritive value of maize silage , 2002 .

[7]  R. Braun,et al.  The role of Lactobacillus buchneri in forage preservation. , 2003, Trends in biotechnology.

[8]  G. Xiccato,et al.  The effect of silo type and dry matter content on the maize silage fermentation process and ensiling loss , 1994 .

[9]  P. Mcdonald,et al.  The biochemistry of silage , 1981 .

[10]  M. Fraser,et al.  The effect of harvest date and inoculation on the yield and fermentation characteristics of two varieties of white lupin (Lupinus albus) when ensiled as a whole-crop , 2005 .

[11]  A. Pell,et al.  Digestion kinetics of dried cereal grains , 2007 .

[12]  A. Prochnow,et al.  Influence of silage additives on methane yield and economic performance of selected feedstock , 2009 .

[13]  J. Rintala,et al.  Storing energy crops for methane production: effects of solids content and biological additive. , 2008, Bioresource technology.

[14]  C. Coble,et al.  Feedstock storage, handling and processing , 1993 .