xt7bzk55g86f https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7bzk55g86f/data/mets.xml Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. journals kaes_circulars_004_550 English Lexington : The Service, 1913-1958. Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Circular (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n. 550 text Circular (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n. 550 2014 true xt7bzk55g86f section xt7bzk55g86f t T Rhkji-;S\/EU
M, ‘»` Y [ ‘? @35]
_ ‘*;»x?’ZFI!I\’IENT s;TATm»w
Linkmmv
CIRCULAR 550
cmd
By W. P. GARRIGUS
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
Agricultural Extension Service
CONTENTS
PAGE
111tr0du<·rio11 ..........4...............................,.................,....................... fi
Reasmis for Increased Popularimy ................................................ 4
Advaruages ()ver Hay ............................................................ 4 1 V
Advantages Over (jultivated Silagc Crops .......................... 8
Surplus Forage for Silage ......................,............................... 8
(miss Silage for Dmuth Euiergency Feed Reserves .......... 9
'1`he ()1l1erSi<1eoE1he Picture .................................,.................... 10
Huw no Blake Grass Siluge ..............................,....,........................ 12 1
'l`<» \\'i1t or Nm to \Vi1t .......................................................... 12
}·`i·<·<1iug (Qruss Silage ...................................................................... 19
(P}mu»: New 1*1<·ll;uuI Machine Cu.)
(Zmvr 111l\\Il.\I1U!lZ Surplus pusmre lbrzngc 1l1ll`\(’\1L‘(1 im gums silnge inukes
lmv amt und nimitinm |<·<·c1 Inr \\’1Il[CI`1llg livestmk.
Grass Siluge
By W. P. GARRIGUS
Grass silage has proved superior to and is more economical
than most other harvested roughages. This is especially true where
curing weather is unreliable, soil erosion is an acute problem,
_ i and when a high protein, carotene, and mineral content is im-
pO1`t3llt. Kentucky farmers who have tried grass silage are finding
that 2 acres of forage properly ensiled are equivalent in feeding
value to 3 acres of the same forage cured in the held. This circu-
lar points out some of the reasons why this is so, and also some of
the precautions and rules that must be observed if success is to
be had with grass silage.
, During the past 20 years, farmers throughout the United States
have found grass silage to be an economical and palatable feed
for dairy cattle, beef cattle, sheep, poultry, and even hogs. Re-
search at the Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station and other
stations has shown that good forage, properly made into grass sil-
age, retains a higher percentage of its original feeding value than
when preserved as held-cured hay. Bluegrass grown on fertile land
and ensiled before bloom will make silage containing nearly three
times as much digestible protein and slightly more total digestible
nutrients than are found in the best corn silage per unit of weight.
The unreliable hay»making weather for which Kentucky and
the Southeast are noted is an added reason for making grass silage
inasmuch as only 1 to 4 hours of held wilting are required before
the crop is ready to be put away. Nearly any farmer with the aid
of weather reports can predict the weather that far in advance
with a high degree of accuracy. If an unexpected shower does
occur it does little damage since the forage is still too green to
leach or spoil. Field forage harvesters encourage "direct <·ttt" har-
vesting which completely eliminates the weather haxard.
Dairy farmers should be especially interested in grass silage,
because it enables them to provide the benefits of an even supply
of year—round pasture at a cost well below that of a grain-and—hay
ration. Sheepmen are finding that it far surpasses. both in quality
3
·l
and economy, hay or corn silage as winter roughages. Beef men
have found grass silage to be an ideal roughage, especially for ’
brood cows and stocker cattle.
American farmers have known about grass silage only since
about 1937. During the war years, labor was scarce and the new
held forage harvesters were not available. New silos could not be _
purchased at any price. Molasses and acid for preserving were
available only in very limited quantities and then at a prohibitive
price. Despite these handicaps, grass silage continued to grow in
popularity. Once that labor—saving machinery, new silos, and mo- ‘
lasses again became available, IUOSC commercial dairy farmers and i
many beef and sheep farmers began making grass silage. It has
become a standard roughage on many Kentucky farms, especially
those in rolling areas not suited to the growing of corn and sor-
ghum.
REASONS FOR INCREASED POPULARITY .
Advantages Over Hay
Some of the chief advantages of ensiling grass or legume crops
rather than curing them as hay are the following:
Minimum harvesting 1osses.—Carefully conducted tests have
shown that about 15 percent of the weight of various legume crops
usually is lost in haymaking. even when weather is favorable
and crops are well handled, and that with unfavorable weather
and poor handling the loss frequently runs to 50 percent. This
loss eomes mostly from the shattering of leaves; based on per unit
of weight. the leaves contain twice as much protein and four times
as mueh vitamin .—\ as the stems. The average loss in feeding value
of legumes cured as hay in Kentucky, where the weather at haying
time is olten unfavorable is, therefore. tremendous. For the
l'nited States as a whole it has been estimated that in alfalfa
haymaking alone. there is an annual loss of 1,326,000 tons of dry
matter containing 257.000 tons of crude protein. On the other
hand, harvesting these same crops for silage involves practically
no loss. l·`urther losses of nutrients after harvesting are about the
same in the silo as in the havmow. ranging usually from 5 to 15
percent.
I
5
Superior feeding value.——In tests with fattening steers and
pregnant ewes at the Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station,
alfalfa—molasses silage had a slightly higher feeding value per
pound of dry matter than hay made from the same iield. The
_ feeding value of the silage of course depends on the quality of the
crop from which it is made. Fair results, for example, were ob-
tained from overripe bluegrass made into silage and used as win-
ter feed for ewes. Much better results were obtained when the
- grass was in a more nutritious stage at the time the silage was
" made. In general, grass silage contains at least 9 times as much
vitamin A and lO to 20 percent more protein than hay made from
identical herbage under favorable conditions. Dairy cows pro-
duce somewhat more milk, with nearly twice as much vitamin A
in the butterfat, when they are fed alfalfa—molasses silage, as when
they are fed alfalfa hay alone, for roughage. Grass silage, however,
contains very little vitamin D, which is present in good sun·cured
hay.
More protein is contained in most grass silages than in corn
silage and a higher fattening value per pound of dry matter is
found in some grass silages, such as excellent bluegrass-molasses
V t » w e ·_t~
’*§·· t__N j are t— · ·.v:
‘ · ·¢-J *~·~~ `·= u- .:;·.s¤nr_.¤. ,..,¤,¤mn ,,,,, ¤ m ., “ , " ‘
A YX M " [wwf, *°-'",,»·,., """'°""”" ¤'*··¤=-;*
,s l "'· t if .§f**€“”; V of ’
ug ,,,· , _ _ ;,¤?$ · , -
. » _f` “ _ ,· \ "' . . ‘‘‘‘ ’ Q `.
if tu if ¤ /»c . x
· , ii ~;?é¥ "?¥#;‘ q. ~ ,‘ ,.= Y t "
4 Kyiv r
· · >;·~·{ .;»,_#v·:w.4·»:»l"<¤f;.¢= X —t 1. vte . .,,,3*
V t ,;}‘ it ’ ./r "¤.·‘é:·%· B f>$:"§*··¢¢` .·. ' `·-· te ·,,,,
· V t·*· ¢ · e to ~ · , · z —‘~
L J , {4 V __v’ A xg p ~_ ,1,;%
K I X if `‘‘ · . i f
. wa, Q fi if w e
A _ { `· ¥‘¤• bE%zs.z»§_,»;: ;~;;i;;§7·_g;,,_%:h $_ r_
’ $%$é·»¢ ‘ Jef I. V.
- ,. .,,,, _ ,t‘t ‘ · A ,
bw A TTC`; V ”.;*·'·,0vM_ ,*r 4 .
— x —· —
Pig. l.- The high-protein. mineral and vitamin content of grass silage makes
. it an ideal roughage for dairy cows.
I '
6
silage, than in corn silage. A series of digestion trials with feeder _
steers at the Kentucky Agricultural Experimental Station estab-
lished the following nutritive values for bluegrass, alfalfa, Ladino,
fescue, soybean, and corn silages (see Kentucky Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul.
573 for more details):
Average Digestible Nutrient Contents of Several Silctges
(l)ry Basis; divide by 3 to approximate contents of digestible
nutrients in fresh silage)
Dry Crude Ether Crude N-free Gross Tot. dir:. _
Kind of silage and Quality matter protein extract fiber extract: energy nutrients
W? 72 % 72 "2 Cal gm {J
Ladino clover-
molasses — good .................. 71.9 18.5 2.1 12.9 33.4 3.286 69.5
Soybean-
molasses —- very qood ..... 52.4 9.7 0.5 12.2 26.9 ........ 49.9
l·`t·sent—-molasscs — Fair .......... 60.7 5.5 1.9 18.7 29.7 ..... 56.2
Fvseuc-
molasses — very good .......... 67.0 10.3 2.7 20.4 28.6 3.074 65.3
Ky. bluegrass-
molasses — poor ......,... , ......... 56.0 6.0 1.9 24.7 22.9 2.651 57.9
Ky. bluegrass-
molasses — fair .................... 66.8 11.7 3.8 21.8 25.7 3.281 67.%
Ky. bluegrass- _
molasses — very good .......... 70.} 15.*3 3.9 15.5 29.6 .,...... 69.2
Alfalfa-
molasscs — very good .......... 59.2 12.8 2.6 14.8 24.9 2.648 58.4
(Zorn -- ext·t·llt·nt ...................... 67.3 4.9 2.8 13.7 44.6 2.895 69.5
Less feeding waste.—I.ivestock usually refuse a tenth to a half
of the hay pitt before them, and there is always loss of shattered
leaves in feeding whole hay. These losses are almost entirely
avoided in feeding grass silage. \\'hen silage is of at least stand-
ard quality and is fed in proper amounts. livestock eat practically ‘
all of it, even weeds and stubble. for it is tinely chopped and has
il lllllii(}l`lIl O(lO1` 2ll1(1 KZISIC.
Less S[OI`1Ig€ SPHCC.-;\l)()LlL ill/é t1lI1CS EIS l1lLl(§l1 SfO1`Zlg€ S[)3.C€ is
retptired for loose hay and nearly twice as much for baled or
chopped hay as for an equivalent amount of grass silage. Grass
silage in the silo contains about l 1 pounds of dry matter per cubic
li(N)[, l()OSC lilly lll IllC lll()\\' I1l)Olll l)O1lI1(lS, Z1I1(l Cl10pP€d O1` l)Z11€(1
hay about 8 pounds per cubic foot. Corn silage contains about l2
pounds of dry matter per cubic foot. Silos and one—story stables
can be built more cheaply than the common two—story barns of
similar capacity. Some storage space for hay would still be needed,
however. for it is not good feeding practice to replace all dry
roughage by silage. tSee page 20.)
{ l
7
' " { ”g;·»;.a¤r‘?* # >aMg..
.,4.... ____;, ~•·u.u'z.wM“"“_, gtgj'. ;,_; l;$· ,, ' .V_.. ·_:§*7a“g»·;.;»__ ’ .. , ‘ M_
·` ri-1. V , W **4*:, ... ay. » g;'.i` L ‘ Q}
K, »54y{;;,4V;A_¤ ,_,_..me _, _ gt; · <» 335 i. [fl fi 'I py
""i`:··: .,’s~”Y · " A . ·‘ · ,» Q., "‘r'?E> .
t ~ t v [ t 5 . 7-.§‘,%_ _ ‘. .g~@.*7._.#a an
. ‘ ’* IT'?}. m` .,—- __,. .. ` ' _. r pi? iw ipa, `·~_ .,
;;,.,_,,_·,—, , *:!g•_ _ ut .. . .. ei <1»t,;;§;a,. »*4· ml=.e·%*=/ gL__ y 134
. Hr, . " .2. —‘ { V I .5 < `·:=»¤gt:;a;*h¤"®. Q ‘ — \·,· 3**: .· ‘;
;.*¢»;e=~»- r=·‘=’~*·"·‘g1 _. ». t __§-<·’ ·»z· ’”¥» ° L’·( . t { <—··?. —
Fig. 2.- A concrete-stave bunker-type silo on the University of Kentucky Mer-
cer Yann. This silo requires no upkeep and is well suited to self-feeding
operation. Bunker silos cost less to construct than upright silos. However,
more spoilage of silage occurs in bunker silos.
’ Less fire hazard.—Properly prepared grass silage offers no pos-
sibility of spontaneous combustion nor of fire caused by lightning
or the carelessness of smokers.
Low cost of production.—(}rass silage can be produced at a
cost l5 to 25 percent lower per unit of feed value than either corn
silage or hay. Grass silages are especially helpful in reducing labor
requirements during the summer rush period.
. Reduced weather hazard.—ln about fl years out of 5, as most
Kentucky farmers are all too well aware. the first cutting of
a legumes for hay is damaged or even ruined by rains. Moreover,
the crops that are hard to cure, such as soybeans and cowpeas,
nearly always stiffer weather damage before they can be cured for
hay. Losses sustained in these ways can be avoided by harvesting
these forages for silage.
Fuller use of silo and cutter.-(Lrass silage may be made and
fed out during the summer and early fall when IHOSI silos stand
empty and silage cutters are idle. The same silo may then be used
for corn silage later in the fall. If not all the grass silage is fed
before time for making corn silage. the corn silage can be put on
top of the grass silage without damage to either.
Better control of weeds and parasites.-The heat of the ensil—
ing process kills all weed seeds and parasite eggs in t}1e silage.
{ I
8
Much weedy or parasite-infested herbage which would be quite
undesirable for pasture or for hay can be made into a safe and
good-quality feed through proper ensiling. Even wild onion odors
are dissipated in grass silage to the point where they do not not-
iceably affect the flavor of milk.
Advantage Over Cultivafed Silage Crops
In addition to the 15 to 25 percent lower cost of production
ol grass silage than of corn silage (see above) and the smaller stor- _ A
age space required, grass silage offers a further advantage over
corn silage, especially on farms where erosion losses on cultivated
land are high. Because grass silage is obtained from crops grown
without row cultivation, soil losses in connection with the produc-
tion ol it are low. Grass silage fits well, therefore, with a program
ol soil ttonservation.
Surplus Pasture Forage for Silage
l{(‘IlIll(`liy pastures, especially the bluegrass pastures of central
lietttttclay, generally produtte a surplus of forage during May,
above the immediate tteeds for pasture. During late _]uly and
August. ltowex er. there is usually a shortage of pasture forage. The
use ol this May surplus lor the production of silage to be fed out
during late _[uly and August ollers a new and practical way of _
i 4. r ·'>I“ ° C}., W ' — , ¤
i ( . . ’. %‘?*F" ~~~— i E? ., » ‘ V-;»¥5~*= V 3* ,
·— ‘ l l
_ *.7 . -· r..-.. ·» .·~2. stay, as; .,.. s‘· V \ ·J. { k_ ng
` · _ . _ i R l•i»\%~§$:; l’.,‘jll*&}¢f€lk•i\_’
lf ry; No ,, _ _ i _ W`} _ _ I » ·· *¥ "r{ —
i , in __ · , ’ . , · ;`g`.;* mh¥s*
’ i l a Wilalflglkilii it
?f‘·?l*.,¢’··%—j , , 2 ‘ a ` ‘ s‘e‘ ;’f£ ``rr
`._-%$?; ·` $ ""=· V i< . iff yl" ·i
`i.<$R..· ‘·¢ , , V T · F i_ ·as‘;"
1- * · _ `F ‘·
X: _>
· _ -3‘g~· .; ·,. · 1 , -·
gjg'4 .·l%·$Z _ ~’}.-t’? 7\¥.r*¤.· ` · . . Vg;
Fig. 3.- This mixture ol soybeans, cane and sudan grass yielded over 20 tons
of silage per acre which provided cheap feed for drouth emergency use.
r I
9
T evening up the forage supply, with more prohtable livestock pro-
dtiction and better pasture management as the result.
If silage is to be made from the surplus pastures, a fertile one-
fotirth to one-third of the pasture acreage, not too rough for har-
vesting machinery. should be left ungrazed during the spring
months. Bltiegrass forage will usually be 10 to 15 inches high and
just heading out, but not yet in bloom, by late May. This is the
4 right stage of growth for harvesting it for silage. On fertile land
. where there is a good stand of bluegrass intermixed with some
white clover or other legumes, 1% to 3 tons of silage per acre may
usually be expected. Previous top—dressing with manure or nitrate
will increase yields and lower harvesting costs. Other pasture
mixtures will produce even greater yields of forage.
Silage can be made. of course, from the surplus forage on
grazed pastures. but it is more economical to set off a portion of
· the pasture and keep it ungrazed until it is cut for silage. lt; takes
more time and labor. and therefore costs more, to get from the
entire grazed pasture the same amount of silage furnished by an
ungrazed portion.
Grass Siluge for Drouth Emergency Feed Reserves
Crass silage makes an ideal forage to hold in reserve for use
— during drouth emergencies. It may be produced from surplus or
weedy forage during rainy periods, and stored in inexpensive
trench silos until needed. livery livestock farm needs such a re-
serve feed supply. lt will permit heavier stocking of pastures and
therefore more complete and more profitable forage utilization,
sinre farmers having such a reserve will not continually under-
stork their pastures with the idea that sooner or later they will
be caught short of feed. Then, too, feed purchased during drouth
periods is always cost ly. Trench silos for storing such feed reserves
need not have concrete floors or sides since they will be emptied
only once every 1 to 6 years and then usually during dry weather.
The stored silage should be adequately covered with dirt. ground
limestone. or durable paper or plastic and protected from surface
drainage into the silo. Properly prepared silage so stored should
retain most of its feeding value for periods up to 10 years. Enough
drouth emergency zoughage reserves should be on hand at all
r
10
' A ~ \ · i
i I v
l _
it i l
i V V l
' ··. _... , `lj 7 =¤
` A ·Y,.· ¢4'0' W
*· yy); Pl » lz
` l will ii ?*¤·;s:J) , ~
_ C; gh " A ` A Zil f g;
( , · . , ..,. ' _,:Z
use {fl _ / » ‘
` / ’,s¢ll·"’ · 5 ‘
• l k *‘ V,V, ffr ., gg;
; a ,9,
; f ‘· · _
a , w e io
A »v _ »
"
z . ·V‘·
’-·—·»· gi, -
i ,,;‘¤_ , .`:,'¤:·'3~·‘_;
-*5,}* · ~*·~ g~l*¤‘3l2s*$*¢_,»
w AV, · e;f# ,;_»-3*;;
·'= /‘_ $1 ’‘`*`A Q’~r· `
Fig. 4.- This trench silo is in zi shed aittuclied to at livestock bum. It provides
low-rost und stile storage for grass silzige.
times to marry the normzil livestock inventory nil the larin. on at
least ui;iinten:m<·e rzitions, lor zt period ol Il to li months.
No lzirmer who is thinking ol? putting up grass silage lor the
lust time should l`;1il to give lull weight to the tlisziclvzuitages in-
rolied. ililiese distulvzmteiges are lor the most part dangers or risks
to he zuoided. lll proper eztrc and foresight are taken most of them
will not proxe troublesome. The more iiiiliorumt oi these dis-
.ulx;uit;iges or risks zire the following:
Stronger silos l`€(lllll`€(l.—Gl`2lSS silztge. espetizillv when ox erlv
wet. motltirt-s more pressure on a silo than does tom silage. Be-
lore lilling xt silo with grass silztge for the hrst time. therelore. be
sme thzit the silo is strong enough to hold the grass silage. Silos
{ I
ll
to be used for grass silage require double the amount of reinforc-
. ing steel used for corn silage, unless Hlled to no greater height
than l5 or 20 feet. (See U. S. Dept. Agr. Farmers’ Bulletin 1820.
"Silos, Types and Construction," pages 10—l2.)
Danger from asphyxiation.—Since all silage, and especially
grass silage, settles considerably overnight and produces a large
amount of carbon dioxide gas, workmen should not enter a partly
filled silo in the morning until the blower has been in operation
for a few minutes to clear out the carbon dioxide. Farmers should
· also watch out for a poisonous gas—nitrogen dioxide—that may
P form in fresh silage. This gas causes “silo—liller’s disease," a re-
cently discovered hazard to farmers and their families and to live-
stock. Its symptoms are severe coughing and burning or choking
pains in the throat and chest. After awhile the pains disappear.
leaving the exposed person free of discomfort for 5 to l2 hours.
But then severe illness can strike, owing to lung irritation caused
V by the gas.
These safety precautions should be observed in filling all
tower silos:
l. Run the blower for 10 minutes before going into a partly
filled silo. Always keep the blower running while you are inside.
2. Be alert to irritating odors. Nitrogen dioxide is heavier than
air and collects near the surface of the silage. The gas tends to
settle in the silo chute and around the base of the silo.
3. \\’atch for yellowish brown fun1es—they signify nitrogen
dioxide. If you can't see readily in the silo, use a flashlight.
-l. Keep children and animals out of the silo and away from it
dttring filling.
Strain on haying equipment.—l?orage weighs almost three times
as inunh per unit of volume when ready for ensiling as it does
when cured for hay. Therefore, some farmers have broken side-
delivery rakes. hayloader ropes, and wagons by trying to handle
too much of this heavy material at one time. Either the green
herbage should be handled at a slow, steady rate. or new heavy-
duty equipment should be procured.
Hard on concrete.-All silage is somewhat acid and, therefore.
gradually dissolves the lime from concrete silos or the mortar
{
12 -
joints in tile silos. Grass silage made from too-wet forage is slightly
more acid than corn silage and is consequently more injurious
on the silos. Good-quality grass silage made from forage con-
taining the right amount of moisture and preserved with molasses
is not appreciably more destructive of silos than corn silage.
Various preparations are available for coating the inside of the
silo to reduce this corrosion. (See U. S. D. A. Farmers Bul. 1820,
pages 15-17.) ‘
Risk of spoilage.—Inexperience in making grass silage may
sometimes prove costly, for if forage is ensiled when too wet it will
usually produce strong, putrid silage, but if ensiled when it is
too dry the silage will heat excessively and sometimes may char.
lu either case the feed value of the silage is greatly reduced. Thus
it is essential that care be taken to have just the right amount of
moisture in the forage if the tnaximum feeding value is to be re- .
tained.
HOW TO MAKE GRASS SILAGE
\\'hile we still don’t know everything toncerning the produc-
tion of grass silage from the various crops. with or without one
of numerous preservatives, some facts about its production are
definitely established.
(Irops to use.—Almost any crop that can be made into satisfac- .
tory hay can be made into an even more satisfactory livestock feed
liv ensiling. I.egumes, cereals, and grasses all are equally well
adapted to the production of good-quality silage. As a rule. first- V
t uttings and weedy crops are ensiled. lt should be borne in mind,
however. that the process of ensiling merelv preserves in palatable
form the nutrients contained in the forage when harvested. The
better the forage is. the better the silage produced from it will be.
llecattsc of the high tnoistttre content of silage. 21/Q to fl times as
mauv tous will be produced per acre as would be expected of the
trop if it were made ittto hay.
To Wilt or Not To Wilt?
l`he answer to the question of whether to wilt forage before
t-usiling depends to a large extent on the tvpc of silo to be used
lot storing the silage.
I·`or upright silos.—l·`or the production of the best silage in up-
tight silos the drv matter cottteut of the forage should be from M)
~ 13
to 35 percent. This percentage is usually obtained by cutting the
crop at the hay—making stage or somewhat earlier and allowing it
t0 wilt in the sunlight for 1 to 4 hours. Forage containing too
much moisture usually produces slimy, putrid silage, and causes
excessive leakage of juices from the silo. U. S. D. A. research shows
that forages containing only 15 percent of dry matter when ensiled
3 . ,, _`¤· YW ', ]» \ t __€;._gj_%·>‘;>z»'j ", Y jj / ’
5 — . 4 ‘ *" ‘ _ — . *~;:‘@·.¥a;sf;s}§ ' I `-.-,
\.j \ 3 / V" Aj ; _-._ ,
\ ` tl »*’:V 1‘¤' - .*.— #
lz =, / < W-.§€ ’ — t ·
V @4 " {EQ ° V
M , i jlynr R '
' ‘ ¤ ~ i__
— V *5. ,._..,, ‘—.1f,_ ._ ¤-
. 2,* . »#·<.s-`~+ *- il;-· V — ‘
. - ~ ..TC........ .... t ..... _. ‘ V .. -.
`~ `»’i ez ·¢ ( .4,,. ,v "
e a.it ,
_./= j
.-·· ’
Fig. 5.- Modern labor-saving equipment helps to make grass silage produc-
tion an easy and efficient operation.
will lose up to l0 percent of their total dry matter in the juices
that seep out of the silo for several weeks after Hlling. These are
the soluble portions and therefore the more nutritious ones. This
runoff from overly-wet silage can, by itself, result in feed losses
up to 20 percent of the total at time of ensiling. On the other _
hand, crops that are too dry when ensiled do not settle well. and
they undergo excessive fermentation and charring, except in tall
silos (30 or more feet of silage) where there is enough pressure
from the silage above to exclude most of the air. Crops are more
often ensiled in upright silos when too wet than when too dry.
The time required to reduce the moisture content of a crop
depends on air temperature, movement and humidity, and on
the size of the stems. I)rying is rapid on hot. dry days, and slower
on sultry or cold days. Fine-stemmed crops such as bluegrass and
Korean lespedeza dry rapidly, whereas coarse—stemmed crops such
as soybeans, sweet clover, alfalfa, and red clover dry less rapidly
and should not be windrowed for that reason .
14
¥Vilting may be impracticable when the weather is unsuitable
or when held forage choppers are to be used, especially on stony
land where the choppers will pick up loose stones in windrowed
forage. Custom operators are, naturally, reluctant to wait for
forage to wilt.
\\’here practical, wilting not only produces better silage but
saxes labor, since only two-thirds as much total weight will be
hauled and blown into the silo when the forage contains 30 per-
cent dry matter as when it contains only 20 percent. It has been ‘
shown that high—producing dairy cows will not consume as much
drv matter from high—moisture silage as from silage containing 30 .
to percent dry matter.
An alternative to wilting is the addition of ground ear corn,
ground corn cobs, chopped hay or chopped straw to the forage at
time of ensiling. These dry materials mixed with the over1y—wet
forage will soak up the excess moisture, thereby preventing costly _
runofl and improving the quality of silage produced. Three hun-
dred pounds of such dry materials mixed with 1,700 pounds of
20-percent forage will bring the dry matter content of the mixture
up to 30 percent, an ideal level.
For horizontal silos.—It is hard to get forage too wet for stor-
age in trench, stack, or bunker silos, especially when it is ensiled
without chopping. In such silos most forage should be ensiled
without wilting since the depth of silage, and therefore the pres- -
sures, are such that little runoff may be expected. Then, too, the
wettcr silage will pack better and therefore have less spoilage.
When to cut.—The most favorable times at which to cut so1ne
of the crops commonly grown for silage are when the crops are
in the stages of maturity stated in the following tabulation:
Approximate Hours of
Dry-matter Sun-\Vilting
Stage of Content at before
Maturity Cutting Ensiling
TTT) P_€W_L'—·T__;- % %
Alfalfa .............................................. I Q bloom 22 - 27 2 - S
Red clover ...................................... I E to full bloom 23 - 28 2 - 3
Korean lespedeza .......................,.... I g to full bloom 30 — $5 0 - 1
Soybeans .................,........................ pods II} filled 23 - 28 2 - 3
Cowpeas ....,............................,........ first pods filled 16 - 21 3 - 4
Sweet elover ..........,......................... I 2 to full bloom 20 — 25 3 - 4
Bluegrass ........................................ before bloom 25 - 30 0 - 1
'1`imothy or orchard grass .............. before bloom 25 - 30 1 - 2
(Terr-als ............................................ early milk stage 22 - 27 2 - 3
15
Letting the crops become more mature usually results in an
increase in dry-matter content but a decrease in total feeding
value. This fact is illustrated in the following data from the Ken-
tucky Agricultural Experiment Station.
Total
Di»$:;i;?;‘*
o st.
‘ Kentucky Bluegrass, before bloom .......... . ................................... 5.1 25.1
Kentucky Bluegrass, early bloom ................................................ 3.9 23.9
Kentucky Bluegrass. past bloom ..........................................,....... 2.0 19;
Determining dry matter content.—A simple test to approxi-
mate the dry—matter content of the forage is especially helpful
to those who are inexperienced in making grass silage. The day
before one plans to ensile the crop. cut a sample of the forage
· (2 or 3 pounds). weigh it on fairly accurate scales, such as milk
scales, and dry it for 3 to 6 hours in the oven of the kitchen stove
held at approximately 220° to 25()°F. 1f the oven has no vent;
the door should be left slightly ajar to permit the moisture to
escape. After the drying, remove the sample from the oven and
weigh it immediately, before it has time to absorb moisture from
the air. Multiply the dry weight figure by l()() and divide the
product by the wet weight, to arrive at the percentage of dry
‘ matter. 1)rying 1nay be hastened by cutting the sample into short
lengths. A patented device which will make an accurate dry-
matter determination in 10 to 20 minutes is now on the market
but its cost is so high that it should be purchased cooperatively
by several farmers in a community.
Equipment needed.-Farmers who have a silo and silo filler
need purchase little or no additional equipment in order to put
up grass silage. However, a windrow attachment for the mower,
a sturdy hayloader, and a silo filler designed to handle green for-
age crops are all considered very desirable by those who have used
them. Some silo fillers have molasses pumps and automatically
controlled feed valves which save time and give a more uniform
mixture of forage and preservative. Field forage harvesters greatly
reduce labor requirements but the cost of one is excessive unless
it is to be used to put up at least 300 tons of forage per year.
\Vagons with unloading devices are also great savers of labor.
Preservatives to use.——\tVhen the forage is exactly in the right V
condition and the silo is properly filled, good silage can be pro-
duced from grasses or legumes without the aid of any preservative.
But. because conditions are not always ideal, most farmers have
decided that a preservative is well worth the small extra cost and
trouble, especially as a large part of the value of the feed-type
preservatives is retained in the silage. About 75 per cent of the
leed value of molasses or ground grain is usually retained.
Though many preservatives have been used successfully with _
grass silage, only three deserve recommendation for use in Ken- ’
tuclay. These are molasses, ground grain (or corn-and-cob meal)
and sodium metabisullitc. Molasses is the cheapest and, up until .
recently, was the most popular.
(Around grain or corn-and-cob meal are easier to apply than
molasses to lield—chopped forage since they may be spread uni-
l`ormly over the top of each load of chopped forage before it is
unloaded into the blower. These preservatives produce top qual-
ity silage, add to the feed value of the silage, and also reduce the
average tnoisture content of the silage. \tVhere no grain is to be
fed with the silage, the use of feed-type preservatives is especially
rettonnncnded since their added carbohydrate helps rutnen 1nicro·
organisms to function properly and therefore brings about better
utilization of the silage.
Sodium tnetabisullite is a dry powder that combines with the t
lorage juices to produce sulfur dioxide and, later, sulfurous acid.
lt therefore has the same action as sulfur dioxide gas which is
more dillicult to apply evenly and usually more costly to obtain. · ~
While sodium metabisullite adds nothing to the feeding value
nf the silage, it does an excellent job of preserving the color, caro-
tene, and mttritive values contained in the forage. Its use often
results in the production of very palatable silages, but it cannot
completely overcome the handicap of excessive moisture or exces-
sive dryness in the ensiled forage. Preliminary research results
indicate a slight itnprovetnent in the digestibility of silage due to
the use of sodium metabisulhte as a preservative.
The amounts of preservative needed per ton of silage are given
in the following tabulation:
17
Any one of the following preservatives-
Ma. SSES @2;:::* %m:S; M.i2;“;;a...
Cereals in milk stage)
Grasses in bloom ) .................................... 40 100 125 8
Grasses before bloom )
Grass—and-legume mix) .............