## 4 Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Items** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**High Moisture**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Low Moisture**} \\ \hline  & **Control** & **KCC-51** & **KCC-52** & **Control** & **KCC-51** & **KCC-52** \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Microbiology (log10/g\({}^{-1}\))**} \\ \hline
**TB** & 8.76 \(\pm\) 0.02 b & 9.85 \(\pm\) 0.03 a & 9.85 \(\pm\) 0.12 a & 8.73 \(\pm\) 0.03 c & 9.65 \(\pm\) 0.03 b & 9.80 \(\pm\) 0.03 a \\
**LAB** & 7.34 \(\pm\) 0.02 b & 8.47 \(\pm\) 0.03 a & 8.79 \(\pm\) 0.12 a & 7.27 \(\pm\) 0.03 c & 8.62 \(\pm\) 0.03 & 8.76 \(\pm\) 0.02 \\
**Yeast** & 5.32 \(\pm\) 0.04 a & 4.45 \(\pm\) 0.16 b & 4.32 \(\pm\) 0.07 b & 5.66 \(\pm\) 0.04 & 4.96 \(\pm\) 0.05 & 5.07 \(\pm\) 0.04 \\
**Mould** & ND & ND & ND & ND & ND & ND \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* TB: Total bacteria; LAB: Lactic acid bacteria; ND: not detected. Data are expressed as the mean \(\pm\) S. E.M. of five replicates, counting analysis was performed with three technical replicates from each sample. a, b, c \(p\) \(<\) 0.05 alphabets within columns indicate significant differences between experimental silages.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Microbial populations of low and high moistures silages of triticale in non-inoculated and inoculated (KCC-51 and KCC-52) silages of triticale at high and low moistures. process enhanced acidification of tritticale silages at both high and low moisture by increasing lactic acid concentration. Generally, enhancement of acidification is closely associated with the preservation of the ensiled silages. An addition of LAB at ensiling is intended to ensure rapid and fermentation of silages as it results in faster accumulation of lactic acid, reduced pH ranges at both high, and low moisture of ensiled silages which makes an unfavorable condition for enterobacterial growth [39; 40]. Many reports suggested the advantage of LAB as inoculants for silage production which can utilize the water-soluble carbohydrates and convert into a lactic acid level, it is a major and important acid in the fermented silages and also a key marker of the preserved high quality silages [41; 42]. LAB, particularly _lactobacillus sp._ in the plants, is not sufficient to induce expected fermentation rates when ensiled silages resulted in higher pH, which is favorable for the undesirable microbial growths [43]. In the present study, non-inoculated silages of both low and high moistures had low numbers of LAB with high numbers of other epiphytic bacteria and yeast counts, while KCC-51 and KCC-52 treated silages had a higher population of LAB with lower counts of yeast which indicates the addition of inoculants dominated the growth of other epiphytic bacteria other than LAB. As evidenced that the LAB shared a higher percentage of the population in the total bacteria compared to non-inoculated silages. Successful fermentation indicates the disappearance of enterobacteria and the dominant growth of LAB in the silages. These changes are closely associated with the decline of pH and lactic acid production in inoculants applied silages [44]. The addition of _L. rhamns_ rapidly drops the pH of the silages and inhibited fungal growth and mycotoxin production [39; 45; 46]. Additionally, _L. paracasei_ and _L. rhamns_ could be considered as excellent additives for plant based silage production with enriched nutrients for ruminant and non- ruminants [20; 21; 22]. The preservation of ensiled forage samples for prolonged periods is based on the strong acidification by the microbial inoculants. Faster acidification inactivates proteolytic enzymes activities and controls the diversity and richness of enterobacteria which grow until low pH reached [47]. Reduction of pH is generally used to monitor the silage quality and the ranges between 3.8 to 4.2 are desired for a successful ensiling [41]. In the current study, higher pH was noted in non-inoculated silages at both high and low moistures condition. Higher acidification was noted in the silages treated with KCC-51 and KCC-52.