_Applied_  
_sciences_  
_Article_  
**The Effect of Time and Method of Storage on the Chemical Composition, Pepsin-Cellulose Digestibility, and Near-Infrared Spectra of Whole-Maize Forage**  
**[PERSON] 1,*, [PERSON] 1, [PERSON] 2, [PERSON] 2,**  
**[PERSON] 2 and [PERSON] 1**  
1 VetAgro Sup, UMR Herbivores, Universite Clermont Auvergne, INRA, F-63122 Saint-Genes-Champanelle, France; [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (F.P.); [PERSON]SS] (G.M.)  
2 INRA, UR 0004 P3F Unite de Recherche Pluridisciplinaire Prairies et Plantes Fourrageres, Centre de Recherche Poitou-Charentes, 86600 Lusignan, France; [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (C.B.); [PERSON]M.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (C.G.)  
* Correspondence: [EMAIL_ADDRESS]; Tel.: +33-4-73-62-40-71  
Received: 13 September 2019; Accepted: 6 December 2019; Published: 10 December 2019  
**Featured Application: Predicting the nutritive value of forage relies on forage samples with in vivo values. Obtaining in vivo values is time-consuming because many samples are required. Sometimes, the samples used to develop prediction methods were obtained a long time ago and stored at sub-optimal conditions (temperature and humidity). Consequently, possible modifications to the sample composition under sub-optimal storage conditions can be a source of error when developing prediction methods for the forage's nutritive value. We found that changes in temperate forage samples after 29 years of storage did not modify their nutritive value. Samples stored under ambient temperatures over three decades did not modify their nutritive value compared to the samples stored and frozen at -20 \({}^{\circ}\)C.**  
**Abstract: This study examined the effects of long-term storage conditions on the chemical composition, pepsin-cellulose dry matter digestibility (PCDMD), and visible (VIS)/near infrared spectra (NIR) of forage. Eighteen samples of different whole-crop maize varieties originally harvested in 1987 were used. After drying, these samples were analyzed in the laboratory for ash, crude protein (CP), structural carbohydrates, total soluble carbohydrates (TSC), starch and PCDMD, and the remaining samples were stored frozen (at -20\({}^{\circ}\)C) or at barn temperature (ambient temperatures ranged from -8.5 \({}^{\circ}\)C to 27.1 \({}^{\circ}\)C). In 2016, the samples were analyzed for ash, CP, structural carbohydrates, TSC, starch and PCDMD. The visible/NIR spectra of both storage methods were obtained. Chemical composition and PCDMD analyses revealed significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) between the storage methods for TSC but not for the other parameters (\(p>0.05\)). After sample harvesting in 1987, the analyses were compared with those in 2016. It was found that the post-harvest TSC and ash content were higher (\(p<0.05\)) and lower (\(p<0.05\)), respectively, during 2016. No significant differences were found for starch and PCDMD. Important differences between the VIS/NIR spectra of both storage methods were obtained in the VIS segment, particularly in the area between 630 and 760 nm. We concluded that storing dry forage samples at ambient temperature for a very long time (29 years) did not change their nutritive value compared to the values obtained before storage.  
**Keywords:** whole-maize forage; long-term storage; storage method; chemical composition; nutritive value