## 3 Results
### Baled Silage  
In the second trial, silo bales were used to assess whether the microbial inoculant effects were consistent when moving from laboratory to farm. Silages were opened at 60 d and 90 d and analyzed for chemical composition, microbial counts, and aerobic stability. As shown in Table 2, DPI silage was richer in lactic acid content (2.58 vs. 2.91, \(p=0.039\)) after 60 d of conservation, but WSC tended to be lower (2.54 vs. 1.78, \(p=0.091\)) in 60-d DPI silage. No significant difference was found between treatments in terms of other nutritive, chemical, and microbial parameters. In 90-d ensiled forages, the pH value of DPI silage was significantly higher than the pH value of the control (3.65 vs. 3.72, \(p=0.004\)), while lactate level (2.93 vs. 2.61, \(p=0.053\)) and LA-AA ratio (2.02 vs. 1.75, \(p=0.050\)) seemed to be lower in 90-d DPI silage. No significant difference was found in other parameters between treatments. When silages were exposed to air for a certain period of time, however, there was a numerical nonstatistical decrease in YMC in 90-d DPI silage (Figure 2).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Chemical Composition 2**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**60 d**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**90 d**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & **Control** & **DPI** & \(p\)**Value** & **Control** & **DPI** & \(p\)**Value** \\ \hline DM (\%) & 41.2 \(\pm\) 1.2 & 39.8 \(\pm\) 0.7 & 0.179 & 41.6 \(\pm\) 1.3 & 42.6 \(\pm\) 1.7 & 0.34 \\ CP (\%) & 9.3 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 9.4 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 0.229 & 9.1 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 8.9 \(\pm\) 0.2 & 0.27 \\ ADF (\%) & 25.6 \(\pm\) 1.6 & 25.5 \(\pm\) 1.4 & 0.473 & 24.0 \(\pm\) 0.6 & 23.3 \(\pm\) 0.6 & 0.24 \\ NDF (\%) & 45.6 \(\pm\) 1.0 & 44.8 \(\pm\) 0.7 & 0.284 & 41.8 \(\pm\) 1.2 & 43.0 \(\pm\) 1.9 & 0.31 \\ WSC (\%) & 2.54 \(\pm\) 0.47 & 1.78 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 0.091 & 2.19 \(\pm\) 0.28 & 2.56 \(\pm\) 0.55 & 0.29 \\ Starch (\%) & 26.1 \(\pm\) 2.6 & 26.8 \(\pm\) 2.4 & 0.429 & 30.6 \(\pm\) 2.0 & 31.7 \(\pm\) 1.8 & 0.35 \\ pH & 3.78 \(\pm\) 0.01 & 3.83 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 0.215 & 3.65 \(\pm\) 0.01 b  & 3.72 \(\pm\) 0.01 a  & 0.004 \\ Lactic acid & 2.58 \(\pm\) 0.13 b  & 2.91 \(\pm\) 0.06 a  & 0.039 & 2.93 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 2.61 \(\pm\) 0.14 & 0.053 \\ (\% of DM) & 1.43 \(\pm\) 0.07 & 1.40 \(\pm\) 0.10 & 0.389 & 1.46 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 1.50 \(\pm\) 0.14 & 0.39 \\ LA-AA ratio & 1.82 \(\pm\) 0.16 & 2.10 \(\pm\) 0.11 & 0.109 & 2.02 \(\pm\) 0.05 & 1.75 \(\pm\) 0.12 & 0.050 \\ Butyrate & ND & ND & ND & ND & \\ (\% of DM) & 0.77 \(\pm\) 0.10 & 0.61 \(\pm\) 0.07 & 0.143 & 0.52 \(\pm\) 0.09 & 0.69 \(\pm\) 0.10 & 0.130 \\ LAB (log\({}_{10}\) cfu/g) & 6.82 \(\pm\) 0.27 & 6.43 \(\pm\) 0.19 & 0.150 & 5.00 \(\pm\) 0.00 & 5.23 \(\pm\) 0.23 & 0.19 \\ YMC (log\({}_{10}\) cfu/g) & 0.00 \(\pm\) 0.00 & 0.62 \(\pm\) 0.62 & 0.187 & 2.35 \(\pm\) 0.20 & 1.42 \(\pm\) 0.71 & 0.14 \\ Aerobic stability (h) & 185 \(\pm\) 13 & 165 \(\pm\) 40 & 0.327 & 137 \(\pm\) 47 & 136 \(\pm\) 57 & 0.49 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Effects of inoculant application 1 on the quality and chemical composition of baled silage at different ensiling periods.  
Figure 1: Changes in (a) yeast and mold counts (YMC) and (b) pH of 105-d ensiled laboratory-scale forages during aerobic exposure. Corn silage was treated without (\(\bullet\)-, \(n=3\)) or with (\(\star\)-, \(n=3\)) DPI. Values with asterisk (*) within the same aerobic exposure time differed significantly (\(p<0.05\)). Data were presented as mean \(\pm\) SEM.