JPH01206958A - Production of fermented material of beer cake for feed - Google Patents

Abstract

PURPOSE:To obtain the title fermented material storable in the open air for a long period of time, having unchangeable palatability and excellent shelf stability, by adjusting a fermentation raw material containing beer cake to a specific amount of water and number of lactic acid bacteria added and fermenting. CONSTITUTION:(A) Beer cake produced by beer manufacturing, for example, is dehydrated, dried or blended with another raw material (e.g., barley or white bran) with low water content and adjusted to 45-75wt.% water content and >=0.5wt.% saccharide content capable of being fermented with Lactobacillus bifidus or lactic acid bacteria. The treated beer cake is blended with (B) Lactobacillus bifidus and/or lactic acid bacteria in such a way that the number of live bacteria is >=10<4> (based on 1g component A), made into >=0.6/cm<3> apparent density of the mixture and unaerobically fermented to give the aimed fermented substance.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION Field of Industrial Application The present invention relates to a method for producing a fermented beer grains for feed that has excellent palatability and feed effectiveness and can be stored for a long period of time.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PRIOR ART Beer grounds are the wet solids remaining in the strainer or filter bed during the wort production process in the production of heel, which mainly consists of malt husks and saccharification residues. The main use of beer grains is as feed for livestock, especially as a good roughage for dairy cows.

The beer lees obtained in the wort manufacturing process has a moisture content of up to 80% (by weight, hereinafter the same) and is therefore susceptible to spoilage. This storage problem is a major obstacle to supplying beer lees as materials. In particular, from June to August, when beer consumption is at its peak, the production of beer lees is at its maximum, and the amount far exceeds the demand for feed and other resources. Therefore, in the beer industry, the disposal of seasonal excess beer grounds has become a serious problem.

As a countermeasure to this problem, beer lees is dried and made into silage by being packed in simple silos in dairy farmers' gardens. In the former case, the economic benefits on the supply and demand sides are lost due to the relatively high cost of drying, while in the latter case, modification due to butyric acid fermentation and contamination by mold are unavoidable, resulting in a decrease in feed value. At present, satisfactory results have not been obtained in either case.

JP-A No. 60-21093 discloses a feed characterized by anaerobically fermenting a mixture of a raw material obtained by crushing vegetable organic matter such as agricultural leftovers and food processing leftovers, additive nutrients, and fermentation-promoting bacteria. , and its manufacturing capabilities are disclosed.

In this document, crushed agricultural product residues such as rice straw, crushed food processing residues such as beer lees, and mixtures with nutrients such as starchy substances and molasses are used as raw materials, and the raw materials are fermented using lactic acid bacteria, yeast, etc. Fermentation is carried out under anaerobic conditions by promoting bacteria.

"Research on Animal Husbandry", Vol. 41, No. 7, pp. 849-853 (1987) reports on the production of surplus products into silage by adding lactic acid bacteria, especially pp. 851-85.
Page 2 reports that beer lees could be preserved as high-quality silage by storing beer lees, lactic acid bacteria, and glucose in a plastic bucket and storing them at room temperature for 36 days.

Problems to be Solved by the Invention Conventionally, fermented beer grounds for feed (fermented beer grounds for feed) are produced by adding sugar, etc. to a raw material containing beer grounds and fermenting the resulting mixture under anaerobic conditions. Manufacturing methods are known, but these methods are only for storing relatively small amounts and for short periods of time. Therefore, a method for producing beer grains that is suitable for large quantities and long-term storage during seasons when the production of beer grains is high (i.e., at least one year) and is also satisfactory in terms of palatability is needed from the supply side of beer grains and the demand for beer grains. It was desired by the side.

Therefore, one object of the present invention is to provide a method for producing feed that can be stored for a long time at low cost from beer grounds.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a method for producing feed with excellent palatability at a low cost from beer grounds.

A further object of the present invention is to provide a method for producing feed with high nutritional value at low cost from beer grounds.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION The present invention provides a method for producing a fermented beer lees product for feed by anaerobically fermenting a fermented raw material containing beer lees, in which the water content of the fermented raw material is reduced to 45 to 75% (weight, bifidus). Sugar that can be fermented by bacteria and lactic acid bacteria is 0.5% (
weight), add bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria so that the number of viable bacteria is IO4@ or more per tg of the fermentation raw material, and mix uniformly, and the apparent density of the mixture thus obtained is After adjusting to 0.6 (g/cm') or more,
Ferment anaerobically.

The fermented raw material containing beer lees used in the present invention is
The moisture content is adjusted to 45-75%, preferably 50-70%.

Beer lees immediately obtained in the wort manufacturing process in beer production (hereinafter referred to as draft beer lees) contains about 80% moisture, so in order to adjust it to the above moisture range,
Although dehydration treatment or partial drying treatment can be performed, from the viewpoint of economic efficiency, it is advantageous to adjust the moisture content to the above range by mixing it with other raw materials with low moisture content. Other raw materials to be added to the beer lees may be commonly used feed raw materials, examples of which are as follows.

1) Cereals such as barley and corn.

2) Agricultural processing residues such as beet valves, bran, and rice bran, and 3) Grass, rice straw, etc., or dried products thereof.

In addition, if the water content of the beer lees is less than 45%, the water content can be adjusted to 45 to 75% by adding water or mixing it with the other feed materials mentioned above that have a high water content.

There is no limit to the beer grounds content in the fermented raw material, but the present application is a method for producing a fermented product of beer grounds for feed, and as a general rule, 30% or more is used. Of course, the beer lees content may be less than that or may be 100%.

Bifidobacterium used for fermentation may be any known species belonging to the genus Bifidobacterium (hereinafter referred to as B). The main ones are listed below.

l) Bifidobacterium B, pseudolongum (B, pseudolongum) of animal origin
m) B, animalis (B, animalis) B, thermophilum (B, thermophilum) 2)
Human-derived Bifidobacterium B, Iongum B, B, bifidum B, Breve CB, breve B, Infantis (B, 1nfantis) Among the above, B, Pseudolongum, B, Animalis, B,
Thermophilum is particularly preferred.

Examples of lactic acid bacteria include the genus Lactobacillus (hereinafter referred to as L).

) or Streptococcus R (hereinafter referred to as
All known species of homozygous lactic acid bacteria and heterozygous lactic acid bacteria belonging to the genus S, etc. can be used. Examples of homozygous lactic acid bacteria are as follows.

L, bulgaricus (L, bulgaricus) L,
casei L, plantarum S, thermophilus S,
Examples of heterozygous lactic acid bacteria of S. faecalis are as follows.

L. brevis L6 L. buchneri L. fermenti S. diacetilactis Among these, L. casei; L. plantarum; S. fuecalis , L, Prebis, L, Buchifuri, L, Fermenti are particularly preferred.

Of course, it is possible to use only one type of Bifidobacteria and Lactic Acid Bacteria, but it is preferable to use Bifidobacteria and Lactic Acid Bacteria in combination, and then to use Bifidobacteria alone.
Next, it is desirable to use a combination of heterozygous and homozygous lactic acid bacteria. However, only one type of homozygous or heterozygous lactic acid bacteria may be used alone.

These bacteria are added so that the number of viable bacteria is 104 or more, preferably 105 or more per kg of fermentation raw material.

Beer lees obtained immediately after the wort production process is sterile, but microorganisms multiply over time after it is collected. These microorganisms include bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria. Therefore, if the fermentation raw material contains 104 or more bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria, there is no need to add bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria again.

If the number of viable bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria is insufficient, the number of viable bacteria may be adjusted to 104 or more by adding these bacteria.

However, if the number of viable bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria is excessive, fermentation will only proceed quickly.
In reality, there is no need to go to the trouble of measuring the number of viable bacteria in fermented raw materials.

After filling the mixture to which these fermenting bacteria have been added into containers,
Prior to fermentation, the apparent density (weight relative to a given volume) is adjusted to 0.6 g/cm" or more, preferably 0.7 g/cm3 or more, by compression or deaeration operations.

Furthermore, in order for bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria to ferment, it is necessary that they contain sugars (monosaccharides, oligosaccharides) that they can decompose, and the sugar concentration changes depending on the moisture in the fermentation raw materials. However, it is sufficient if the content is 0.5% or more. Therefore, if it is expected that there will be a shortage of sugar in the fermented raw materials, bifidobacteria and/or
Or sugars that can be decomposed by lactic acid bacteria, such as glucose.

Lactose, blackstrap molasses, etc. can be added.

The outline of the present invention has been described above, and the present invention will be illustrated below through test examples of the present invention. In addition, in the test examples of the present invention, specific bacterial strains are used, but this does not utilize the properties unique to the specific bacterial strains, but simply the specific genus,
This is to make it clear that bacteria belonging to a specific species were used.

(Test Example 1) Lactic acid bacteria powder A (L, plantarum, homozygous lactic acid bacteria) was prepared as follows.

L. plantarum ATCC11917 strain (homotype lactic acid bacteria), yeast extract 1.0%, meat extract 1.5%, peptone 1.0%, l potassium phosphate 0.1%, dipotassium phosphate 0.2%. , anhydrous sodium acetate 0.5%, lactose 3,
2Q medium (pH 6) consisting of 0% cystine and 0.04% cystine.
, 8) for 16 hours at 37°C, the cells were collected by centrifugation, and 100rrl of 10% reconstituted skim milk was added.
After sufficiently suspending the suspension, the suspension is freeze-dried and the tg
Each sample contained loXIolo viable bacteria, and approximately log of plantarum fungus powder was obtained. Add skim milk powder to the obtained bacteria powder9
About 100 g of lactic acid bacteria powder A containing 1 Oxlo'/g of viable bacteria was obtained by powder mixing.

Draft beer grounds with a moisture content of 80% and dry beer grounds with a moisture content of 10% were obtained, and eight types of beer grounds with different moisture content (see Table 1) were prepared. Beer grains with a moisture content of 60 to 75% are prepared by dehydrating beer grains with a moisture content of 80%, and beer grains with a moisture content of 30 to 50% are prepared by adding water to beer grains with a moisture content of 10%. child.

For each 1 kg of the above eight types of beer grounds with different moisture content, the glucose log (approximately 1%) and lactic acid bacteria powder are added to 2 g (number of viable bacteria per 1 g of fermentation raw material: 2X I O
' pieces) and mixed thoroughly to prepare 8 types of samples.

The eight types of prepared samples were each transferred to a 2Q volume beaker, compressed to adjust the apparent density to 0.8 g/cm3, and then fermented anaerobically at 30°C.

After the start of fermentation, pH, appearance, properties 9 fermentation odor, and palatability tests were conducted using milking cows for each of the fermented beer lees that had been consumed for one week. These results are shown in Table 1.

In the palatability test, approximately 100 g of the fermented beer lees was fed to five healthy milking cows and evaluated using the following criteria. In other words, it is not allowed if 3 or more animals do not ingest the food even if the animal is fed on an empty stomach immediately before feeding with normal feed. If at least one animal ingests the animal on a full stomach immediately after feeding with normal feed. Good: If 3 or more animals ingest it even when they are full even after feeding normal feed Best: If 4 or more animals ingest it even when they are full even after feeding normal feed Table 1 80 4.3 Deterioration, blackening - occurrence of beetles
Butyric acid ingredient Not possible 2 75 4.8 Good without deterioration Slightly rancid odor OK 3 70
4.0LL IT Refreshing sour odor
Good 4603.9rt n Good 55Q 4. Qun ura 5 45 5, Q n tt
Mild acid odor OK 7 40 6.0
tt rt No fermentation odor OK83
06.0IJ 11 Fermentable raw materials: beer lees, added sugar content (approximately 1
%), added fermentation bacteria: lactic acid bacteria powder A (L, plantarum, number of viable bacteria per 1g of fermentation raw material: 2 x 104), apparent density: 0.8g/cm3, as is clear from Table 1, sample l (80% moisture
) The fermented product was found to have mold and modification due to butyric acid fermentation, had extremely poor palatability, and was unsuitable for feed. The fermented product of Sample 2 (moisture 75%) had a slight rancid odor, but its palatability was somewhat satisfactory. The fermented product of sample 7.8, which had a moisture content of 40% or less, was not modified, but fermentation had hardly progressed. Sample 6 (
In the fermented product with a moisture content of 45%, the fermentation proceeded slowly, but no deterioration was observed and the palatability was satisfactory. In samples 3 to 5 with a moisture content of 50 to 70%, fermentation was carried out smoothly, and an increase in refreshing sour odor was observed as the pH decreased, and fermented products with good palatability were obtained without deterioration. Ta.

In addition, the fermented products of samples 3 to 8 (moisture 70 to 30%) are as follows:
Even after 3 months, there was no change in taste and no change was observed.

Furthermore, except for changing the bacterial strains used to homozygous lactic acid bacteria, heterozygous lactic acid bacteria, and bifidobacterial strains (all for single use),
Tests similar to those above were conducted, and results similar to those above were obtained in all tests.

Therefore, the moisture content of the fermented raw material is 45-75%, preferably 5%.
It was found that it was necessary to adjust it to 0-70%.

(Test Example 2) The following two types of bacterial powders were prepared by culturing, collecting, and freeze-drying in the same manner as in Test Example 1, except that the bacteria used were changed, and powder-mixing with skim milk powder.

Lactic acid bacteria powder B: L, Buccineri ATCC4005
Strain (heterotype lactic acid bacteria, number of viable bacteria: 5XIO' per 1g) Hifidobacterium terminal X: B, Anisolis ATCC2552
Hifidobacterium strain (animal-derived Hifidobacterium, viable bacterial count: l per 1g)
Except for adding mixed bacterial powder (2XIO' number of viable bacteria per 1 g of fermentation raw material) of 0.05 g of lactic acid bacteria powder A, 0.2 g of lactic acid bacteria powder B, and 0.05 g of bifidobacterium powder X. Eight types of fermented products were prepared in the same manner as in Test Example 1.

Table 2 shows the results of evaluating the fermented product one week after the start of fermentation using the same method as in Test Example 1.

Table 2 1 80 4.3 Alteration, blackening - generation of beetle
Butyric acid ingredients Not allowed 2 75 4.2
No deterioration and good condition. Refreshing sour odor. Good 3.
70 4.0#u
Refreshing sour, fruity smell
fl good 4 [303,8HII 5 50 3.9n
u6 45 4.2 〃u Refreshing sour odor Good 7 40 6, (JL
I II No fermentation odor Possible 8306.0〃n Fermentable raw materials: Beer lees, added sugar content (approximately 1
%), added fermentation bacteria: lactic acid bacteria powder A (L, blank rum,
0.05g).

Lactic acid bacteria powder B (L, Buchineri, 0.2 g).

Bifidobacteria powder Sample 1 with 80% moisture as shown in
The fermented product of sample 7.8 with a moisture content of 40% or less showed the same results as Test Example 1. However, in this test example, fermentation by bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria proceeded smoothly even in the fermented products of sample 6 with a moisture content of 45% and sample 2 with a moisture content of 75%, and as the pH decreased, a refreshing sour odor was observed. It was recognized that there was no change, and the palatability was also good. In particular, the fermented products of Samples 3 to 5, which had a water content of 70 to 50%, were observed to have a refreshing sour odor as well as a fruit odor, and had extremely good palatability.

In addition, the fermented products of samples 2 to 8 (moisture 75 to 30%) were
Even after the month, there was no change in taste, and no change was observed.

Furthermore, when we changed the strains used and conducted a test similar to Test Example 2, using bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria in combination, or homozygous lactic acid bacteria and heterozygous lactic acid bacteria, we obtained similar results. Obtained. However, in the latter case, the production of fruit odor was considerably weaker than in the former case.

From the above results, when using bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria together, or heterozygous lactic acid bacteria and homozygous lactic acid bacteria, it is sufficient to adjust the moisture content of the fermentation raw material to 45-75%, especially 5%.
It was found that an excellent fermented product could be obtained when the concentration was adjusted to 0 to 70%.

(Test Example 3) Draft beer lees with a moisture content of 80% is dehydrated to prepare 7kg of beer lees with a moisture content of 70%, and 70g of glucose (approx.
%) and lactic acid bacteria powder (82.8 g of lactic acid bacteria powder (2X I O' number of viable bacteria per 1 g of fermentation raw material) were added and mixed thoroughly.

1 kg of the resulting mixture was collected in a 2Q volume heater, compressed to prepare 6 types of samples with different apparent densities (see Table 3), and fermented anaerobically at 30°C. The same evaluation as in Test Example 1 was performed on each of the fermented products one week after the start of fermentation.

The results are shown in Table 3.

Table 3 1 0.5 4.4 Modification, blackening - generation of vinyl Butyric acid tool Not available 2 0.6 4.7
No deterioration, slight cracking on the surface, mild acid odor
Fair 3 0.7 4.0 No deterioration, good condition
Refreshing sour odor Good 4 0.9
3.911 1 no
Good 51.13,9
Good 61.23.9〃n Good fermented raw materials: Beer lees (moisture 70%), Added sugar: (
(approximately 1%), added fermentation bacteria: Lactic acid bacteria powder B (L, number of viable bacteria per 1g of fermentation raw material 2XI06), as is clear from Table 3, the apparent density is O95g/c
The fermented product of m3 (sample 1) deteriorated due to butyric acid fermentation, had extremely poor palatability, and was not suitable as a material. Although the fermented product with an apparent density of 0.6 g/cm' (sample 2) was not modified, fermentation by lactic acid bacteria was slow and slight mold growth was observed on the surface, but it was not palatable. was somewhat satisfactory. The apparent density is 0.7-1.2g
/cm3 (Samples 3 to 6), fermentation was proceeding smoothly, a refreshing sour odor was observed as the pH decreased, there was no mold growth or deterioration, and the taste was good. Ta.

Note that the fermented products of Samples 3 to 6 (apparent density of 0.7 g/cm 3 or more) did not deteriorate even after 3 months, and no change was observed in palatability.

Furthermore, similar tests were conducted on samples whose apparent density was adjusted to 1 or 2 g/cm3 or more, and the results showed that the effect on fermentation was different from that when the apparent density was 0.7 to 1.2 g/cm3. It was the same.

Therefore, it has been found that the apparent density of the fermentation raw material may be adjusted to 1.2 g/cm3 or more prior to fermentation within the physically possible range.

Moreover, similar tests were conducted by changing the strain used to other strains of Bifidobacterium or lactic acid bacteria (all used alone), and similar results were obtained.

Therefore, when using only bifidobacteria or lactic acid bacteria, the apparent density should be 0.6/cm3 or more.

It was found that it is necessary to desirably set it to 0.7 g/cm' or more.

(Test example 4) Lactic acid bacteria powder A 0.35g, lactic acid bacteria powder B 1.4g.

Bifidobacterium powder X0.35g mixed powder (fermentation raw material 1
A fermented product was prepared and evaluated in the same manner as in Test Example 3, except that a total number of viable bacteria (2XlO' per g) was used. The results are shown in Table 4.

4 Table 1 0.5 4.5 Deterioration, blackening, mold growth Butyric acid tool No 2 0.6 4.
2 No deterioration, good condition, refreshing sour odor Good 3 0.7 3.9#
/J Refreshing acid odor, fruit odor Best 4 Q, 9 3,8〃u
n best 5 books 3
,3 〃II l/u
Best 1.2' 3,9o tt
n n Best fermentation raw material: Beer lees (
Water content: 70%), Added sugar: (approximately 1%), Added fermentation bacteria: Lactic acid bacteria powder A (L, Plantarum, 0.35g).

Lactic acid bacteria powder B (L, Buchineri, 1.4g).

Bifidobacterium powder X (B, Animalis, 0.35g) mixed bacterial powder total 2.1g (total number of viable bacteria 2XIO' pieces),
As is clear from Table 4, the apparent density is 0°5g/c.
The fermented product of Sample I of rn' deteriorated due to butyric acid fermentation, had extremely poor palatability, and was found to be unsuitable as a material. Samples 2 to 6 with an apparent density of 0.6 g/cm1 or more
In the fermented product, fermentation by bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria proceeded smoothly, a refreshing sour odor increased as the pH decreased, no mold growth or modification was observed, and the taste was good. . In particular, the fermented products of Samples 3 to 6, which had an apparent density of 0.7 g/cm' or more, produced a fruity odor along with a refreshing sour odor, and had extremely good palatability.

In addition, the fermented products of Samples 2 to 6 (apparent density of 0.6 g/cm 3 or more) showed no change even after 3 months, and no change was observed in palatability.

Furthermore, we changed the strains of bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria and used them together.
Similar tests were also conducted using other homozygous and heterozygous strains of lactic acid bacteria, and similar results were obtained. However, when the heterozygous and homozygous lactic acid bacteria were used together, the fruit odor produced was weak. From these results,
When using bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria together, or homozygous and heterozygous lactic acid bacteria, the apparent specific gravity is 0.6g/
It turns out that it is best to adjust it to cm3 or more.

(Test Example 5) In the same manner as Test Example 1, each of the following lactic acid bacteria powders was added to
Adjusted by g.

Lactic acid bacteria powder C: L, casei, IFO-3425 strain (homotype lactic acid bacteria, number of viable bacteria per 1 g of powder: 10Xto') Lactic acid bacteria powder DSL, S-. ATCC-14434 strain.

(Heterotype lactic acid bacteria, number of viable bacteria per 1g of powder 10XIO
'@) Beer lees with 82% water content is dehydrated and the water content is adjusted to 75%. 1 kg of beer lees has 5 g of glucose, respectively.
(approximately 0.5%), lactic acid bacteria powder A-D, and bifidobacteria powder Seven types of samples were prepared.

Each sample was transferred to a 2Q beaker, compressed to adjust the apparent density to 6g/cm3, and then fermented anaerobically at 30°C for 1 week after the start of fermentation. Each fermented product was evaluated in the same manner as in Test Example 1. The results are shown in Table 5.

Sample l using lactic acid bacteria powder A or B alone.

Although none of the fermented products of No. 2 deteriorated, the fermentation by lactic acid bacteria was somewhat slow, and slight cracks were observed on the surface. However, the palatability was somewhat satisfactory. Sample 3 using only Bifidobacterium powder X.
Sample 4 using lactic acid bacteria powder C and B together. In the fermented products of samples 5, 6, and 7, which used bifidobacteria powder However, no cracking or deterioration was observed, and the taste was good. In particular, the fermented product of sample 5.6.7, which used both bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria, produced a fruity odor along with a refreshing sour odor, and had extremely good palatability.

Furthermore, in the samples in Table 5, the strains of each bacteria were changed, and in detail, for bifidobacteria, other strains of bifidobacteria were used, for homozygous lactic acid bacteria, other strains of homozygous lactic acid bacteria were used, Regarding heterozygous lactic acid bacteria, similar tests were conducted using other strains of heterozygous lactic acid bacteria, but similar results were obtained.

In addition, when a test similar to Test Example 5 was conducted by varying the number of viable bacteria of bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria per gram of fermentation raw material, it was found that the number of viable bacteria per gram was 104, preferably 105.
It turns out that similar results can be obtained if the number is more than 1. However, for example, after producing wort, it is stored in a silo,
When using beer lees that have undergone fermentation with bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria, there is no need to add bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria as long as the number of viable bacteria contained therein is equal to or higher than the above lower limit. Furthermore, even if an excessive number of viable bacteria is contained, the number of viable bacteria will only shorten the fermentation period, and therefore, without actually measuring the concentration of viable bacteria in beer and/or lactic acid bacteria contained in beer lees, Bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria may be added at the minimum required concentration.

(Test Example 6) Sample 4 obtained in Test Example 1 (moisture 60%).

Before fermentation), we used the following formula to make a mixed feed for milking cows (before fermentation).
100 kg of control group) was prepared.

Mixed feed heat valve for milking cows 11% Heikicove 11% rice straw
11% commercial compound feed (Endal No. 16) 37
% Sample 4 of Test Example 1 (before fermentation) 30% total
100% Incidentally, the above sample 4 (before fermentation, moisture 60%) has lactic acid bacteria powder A (L, blank rum) added, but has not been published.

As a test plot, 100 kg of the same compounded feed as above was used, except that the same amount of the fermented product of Sample 4 (60% moisture) obtained in Test Example 1 was used instead of the fermented raw material with the above composition.
g was adjusted.

All 10 milking healthy Holstein cows were fed the above control diet twice during loE, twice in the morning and once in the evening, at 10 k each time.
g was fed after milking. Thereafter, the mixed feed of the test group was fed in the same manner for another 10 days during all milkings.

The average amount of milk per day and the average fat percentage of milk were measured during the entire feeding period (20 days) described above.

The results are shown in Table 6, comparing the 10 days for which the control group feed was fed and the 10 days for which the test group feed was fed.

Table 6 Number of days Average milk yield Average milk fat percentage Average milk yield Average milk fat percentage (a) (kg) (%) (k
g) (%)1 251 3.45
253 3.492 245
3.41 259 3.553 2
47 3.44 270 3.61
4 255 3.42 278
3.595 244 3.48
277 3.606 248 3.47
285 3.637 252
3.40 280 3.718 2
45 3.48 280 3.61
9 249 3.42 290
3.59 Fermentation raw materials: beer lees (moisture 60%), added sugar Nigelcose (approximately 1%), lactic acid bacteria powder ALL, plantarum (homotype 9 viable bacteria count per 1g of fermentation raw material 2x)
106 pieces), apparent density: 0.8g/cm3 6th
As is clear from the table, the average milk yield and average milk fat percentage are 1
The average for day 0 was 249 kg during the feed feeding period in the control group.
276 kg (110°8% compared to the control group) and 3.60% (110°8% compared to the control group) during the feed feeding period in the test group, respectively.
04.6%), and the effect of feeding the feed containing the fermented heel lees of the present invention was remarkable. In addition, an increase in average milk yield and average fat percentage was observed two days after switching to the feed in the test area, and this generally means that the amount of feed fed is reflected in milk yield and fat percentage within two days. This is consistent with the finding that

(Test Example 7) Mixed feed for fattened cattle with the following composition (control group) was mixed at 1, 1
I prepared 00kg.

Compound feed hay for fattening cattle 15% Commercial compound feed (early beef) 55% Sample 4 of Test Example 1 (before fermentation) 30% Total 100
%By the way, sample 4 above (before fermentation, moisture 60%)
Although lactic acid bacteria powder A (L, plantarum) was added, it was not fermented.

As a test plot, 1.100 kg of the same mixed feed as above was prepared, except that the same amount of the fermented product of Sample 4 (60% moisture) was used instead of Sample 4 (unfermented).

6 healthy Polstein steers, 8-9 months old, 3
Each cow was divided into two groups, and 6 kg of each of the above-mentioned feeds was fed to each group in the morning and evening for 4 weeks in the same barn, with sufficient ventilation, lighting, and heat retention. In addition, water was freely available for drinking.

During this test period, the daily feed intake and body weight of the pots (test Nos. 1 to 6) were measured at 2 and 4 weeks after the start of the test, and the weight gain during that period was measured.

Average daily weight gain and feed conversion rate (weight gain 1 kg
The feed intake (kg) per day was calculated and compared. The results are shown in Tables 7 to 9.

Table 7 Feed Test Cow Before Test Measurement Items Feed Feeding (Wheat-□ 2nd Week 4th Week Half No., Body Weight (kg) vs. Body Weight (kg) 2
78 298 - Teru 1256 Weight gain (kg) 22 20 21 section Printing weight gain (kg)
1.6 1.4 1.5 Weight (kg)
281 305 -2261
Weight gain (kg) 20 24
221 Weight gain per day (kg) 1.4 1
．． 7 1.55 Weight (kg) 291
309 -3269 Weight gain (kg)
22 18 Weight gain per 20 mark (kg) 1.6 1.3 1.45 trials
Weight (kg)
272 296 -Experiment 4252
Weight gain (kg) 21. 24
22.5 section Printing and weight gain (k
g) 1.5 1.7 1.6 Weight (kg)
) 287 302 -5263
Weight gain (kg) 24 25
24.5 Weight gain per day (kg) 1.
7 1.8 1.75 Weight (kg)
296 318 -6270 Weight gain (kg) 26 22 241 Weight gain per day (kg)! , 9 1.6
1.75 Fermentation raw materials: Hibiru lees moisture 60%), added sugar Nigelcose (about 1%), lactic acid bacteria powder A:L, blank rum (homo type 1 fermentation raw material 1)
Number of viable bacteria per g (2 x 106), apparent density + 0.8 g/cm” Table 8 No. Up to 2nd week After 2nd week Total (kg) Up to 4th week (kg) (kg
) Control group 2 135 173
3084. 123 142
265 test area 5 142 16
1 303 No. 9 Table 1 6, 50 Control group 2 7.00 3 6.42 4 5.89 Test group 5 6.18 6 5.77 As is clear from Tables 7 to 9, the data for the control group In comparison, the test feed containing the fermented beer lees of the present invention had
In terms of average daily weight gain and feed conversion rate,
Both showed immersed results.

(Test Example 8) 300 kg of fattening pig compound feed (control group) was prepared by uniformly mixing the mixture (unfermented) of the fermented raw material and bacterial powder prepared in Example 2 in the following formulation.

Pig compound feed for fattening Corn 25% Milo 25 Fishmeal 1.5 Soybean meal
lO wheat gluten 5 molasses
Book salt 0.5 Calcium carbonate 0.5 Tricalcium phosphate
1.0 Vitamin and mineral mixture 0.5 Fermented raw material/bacteria powder mixture 20 Total too.

As a test plot, 300 kg of feed having the same formulation as above was prepared, except that the fermented product was used instead of the mixture (unfermented) of the fermented raw material and bacterial powder of Example 2 used in the test plot.

Incidentally, the data for the mixture of fermentation raw materials and bacterial powder (before fermentation) is as follows.

Beer lees (68% moisture) 1
200kg blackstrap molasses (fermentable sugar content 70%)
20 kg Lactic acid bacteria powder E (L, casei) 500 g Bifidobacterium powder Y (B, thermophilum) 500 g Total number of viable bacteria per 1 g of mixture 1.6XIO'
Six castrated Landrace sows (weight 56.9 to 62.8 kg), approximately 3.5 months old, were divided into 2 groups of 3 pigs each and kept in the same pigpen with sufficient ventilation, lighting, and heat retention. However, one group was fed the control diet, and the other group was fed the test diet for 4 weeks. During this period, drinking water was provided ad libitum. The same measurements and calculations were performed for the same items as in Test Example 7 for each test pig (No. 7 to 12). The results are shown in Tables 10 to 12.

Table 10 Weight (kg) 71.7 80.9
- vs. 7 60.1 Weight gain (kg)
11.6 9.2 10.4 light
Weight gain per day (g) 829
657 734 Ward Weight (kg) 65.1 74.9 -1
11 56.9 Weight gain (kg)
8.2 9.8 9.0 Weight gain per day (g
) 586 700 643 Weight (kg)
71.5 82.0 -961, Za
Weight gain (kg) 9.7 10.5
10.11 Weight gain per day (g) 693
750 721 Weight (kg) 74.4
87.3 -10 62.3 Weight gain (kg) 12.1 12.9 12
．． Weight gain per 5 mark (g) 864 921
892 trial weight (kg)
69.7 78.9 -Experiment 11
57.1 Weight gain (kg) +2. T3
9.2 10.9 Ward
Weight gain per day (g) 900 657
778 Weight (kg) 71.6 84
．． 1 -12 60.5 Weight (kg)
11.1 12.5 11.8th
11 Table No. Up to 2 weeks After 2 weeks Total (k
g) 4 weeks (kg) to 0 control group
8 30 34 64 test area
11 38 28 66th
12 Table 7 3.51 Control group 8 3.56 9 3,47 to 3.08 Test group 11 3.03 12 3.01 As is clear from Tables 10 to 12, compared to the control group feed, The feed in the test group containing the fermented beer grains for feed of the present invention showed excellent results in both the average daily weight gain and feed conversion rate.

The test examples illustrating the claimed invention have been described in detail above.
The present invention will be further explained in detail below through some examples of the present application.

(Example 1) Powders of lactic acid bacteria and bifidobacteria described below were prepared by the following method.

Lactic acid bacteria powder E: (L, casei, isolated from silage) 345 kg (number of viable bacteria per gram of powder: 20XIO') Lactic acid bacteria powder F: (L, Buccineri, isolated from silage) 345g (number of viable bacteria: 10XIO' per gram of powder) ) Bifidobacterium powder Song Y: (B, thermophilum, isolated from cow feces) 345 g (Number of viable bacteria per 1 g of powder: 20 x 104) Bacteria isolated from each collection source were placed in the medium a, oooQ described in Test Example 1. After culturing at 37°C for 16 hours, the cells were cooled to 10°C and passed through an Alfa Laval MRPX-418 centrifuge at a flow rate of 6°000Q per hour.
Concentrated bacterial solution 15 (H2) was prepared. After thoroughly mixing this with 20% reduced skim milk 150Q, it was frozen at 0°C, 3 Torr, and 30°C for 14 hours using Kyowa Vacuum Co., Ltd.'s freeze dryer RL model. Dry.

A mixture of fermentation raw materials and bacterial powder having the following composition was sufficiently mixed using a Complete Mixer CM model manufactured by Complete Feeder Co., Ltd., and the moisture content was adjusted to 60%.

Draft beer lees (80% moisture) 2
000kg beet pulp
200kg barley
100kg corn
100kg malt husk
50kg glucose
20kg lactic acid bacteria powder E powder, casei) 13
0g lactic acid bacteria powder powder L, Buchineri)
130g Bifidobacterium powder Y (B, thermophilum) 130g total
2470.39 kg of the obtained mixture was placed in two 1 m3 flexible bags made by Tamago Seibag Co., Ltd.
After filling each bag in kilograms, deflating the bag with a large commercial vacuum cleaner for 3 minutes to deflate the bag, adjusting the apparent density and sealing it,
It was stored outdoors to start fermentation. Two weeks after the start of fermentation, the feed-use fermented heel cake (p
H3,81) Approximately 1200 kg was obtained.

The main data of the mixture of the above-mentioned fermentation raw material and bacterial powder before the start of fermentation were as follows.

Sugar content available for fermentation: approx. 0.8% Mixture 1
Total number of viable bacteria per g: 2.6XIO' cells Appearance density: 0.8g/cm3 Outside temperature during fermentation = 20±7°C This fermented product can be stored outdoors for over a year (sealed) There was no deterioration or change in palatability, and the shelf life was extremely good.

The feed effect of the feed using this fermented product is shown in Test Example 6.
It was as shown in 7.

(Example 2) Beer lees with a moisture content of 80% was dehydrated using a dehydrator PB-LOOT manufactured by Kato Tekkosho Co., Ltd., to obtain dehydrated beer lees 1 with a moisture content of 68%.
200 kg was prepared.

Using the same complete mixer as in Example 1, the fermented raw materials and bacterial powder were uniformly mixed in the following formulation, and the water content was reduced to 68%.
adjusted to %.

Beer lees (68% moisture) 120
0kg blackstrap molasses (70% sugar)
20kg lactic acid bacteria powder E (L, casei)
500g Bifidobacterium powder Y (B, thermophilum) 500g total
1221 kg 600 kg of the above mixture
The mixture was filled into one 3 m3 flexible bag, deaerated for 5 minutes using a large commercial vacuum cleaner to adjust the apparent density, and then stored outdoors to start fermentation.

The details of the data of the above mixture before the start of fermentation were as follows.

Sugar available for fermentation: Approximately 1.1% Total number of viable bacteria per 1g of mixture: 1.6XIO' Appearance: Density: 1.1g/cm' External temperature during fermentation: 20±7℃ One week after the start of fermentation, A feed-use fermented beer lees product (pH 4
,0) Approximately 600 kg was obtained.

Even if this fermented product is stored outdoors (sealed) for more than a year,
It did not deteriorate or deteriorate, its palatability did not change, and its storage life was extremely good.

The feed effect of the feed using this fermented product was as shown in Test Example 8.

(Example 3) In the same manner as in Example 1, a mixture (water content: 70%) of fermentation raw materials and bacterial powder having the following composition was prepared.

Draft beer lees (moisture 79%) 60
0kg beet pulp
50kg barley
30kg bran
30kg corn
30kg glucose
5 kg Bifidobacterium powder Y (B, thermophilum) 5 g The above mixture was filled into a flexible bag with a total volume of 1 m3, and degassed for 4 minutes using a large commercial vacuum cleaner to reduce the bag and filling volume to adjust the apparent density. They stored them outdoors and began issuing them.

The detailed data of this pre-fermentation mixture were as follows.

Sugar content available for fermentation: Approximately 0.7% Total number of viable bacteria per 1 g of mixture: 2.8 x 105 cells Appearance is density' 1. Og/cm' Outside air temperature during fermentation: 20±7°C From the start of fermentation to one year after fermentation, the beer did not deteriorate and had a refreshing sour and fruity odor, making it an extremely palatable feed beer. Approximately 740 kg of fermented lees (pH 3.9) was obtained.

This fermented product does not deteriorate even if stored outdoors for more than a year.
There was no change in palatability, and storage stability was extremely good.

(Example 4) In the same manner as in Example 1, a mixture (water content: 50%) of fermentation raw materials and bacterial powder having the following composition was prepared.

Dried beer grounds (moisture 10%) 4
50kg water
1300kg beet pulp
300kg bran
300kg blackstrap molasses (70% sugar content)
20kg lactic acid bacteria powder E (L,
casei) 50g lactic acid bacteria powder F
(L, Buccineri) 50g total
2370.1kg
After covering the inner side of a simple iron plate silo in the garden of a dairy farmer with a vinyl sheet, the above mixture is filled by stepping on it, the surface is further covered with a vinyl sheet, and weights and sand are placed on top, so that the apparent density was prepared and fermentation was started.

Details of the above mixture before the start of fermentation were as follows.

Sugar content available for fermentation: Approximately 0.6% Total number of viable bacteria per 1g of mixture: 6.5XlOs Apparent density: 0.8g/cm3 Outside air temperature during fermentation: 20±7℃ After starting fermentation After one month, the fermented beer grains for feed had no deterioration, had a refreshing sour odor, and had good palatability.
About 2350 kg (pH 4.0) was obtained.

This fermented product will not deteriorate even if stored as is for more than a year,
There was no change in palatability, and storage stability was extremely good.

(Example 5) In the same manner as in Example 1, a fermentation raw material and bacterial powder mixture (65% moisture) having the following composition was prepared.

Chemical beer lees (moisture 78%) 6001
c g heat valve 6
0kg barley 3
0kg bran
30kg glucose
6kg Bifidobacterium powder Y (B, thermophilum) 100g total 7
26.1 kg 'The above mixture was completely filled into a flexible bag with a total volume of 1 m3, deaerated for 3 minutes using a large commercial vacuum cleaner to reduce the bag and filling volume, and the apparent density was adjusted, and then sealed. Fermentation has started.

The details of the above mixture before the start of fermentation were as follows.

Sugar content available for fermentation: Approximately 0.8% Total number of viable bacteria: 2.7XIO' cells Appearance density: 0.8 g/cm" Outside temperature during fermentation: 20 ± 7°C After starting fermentation In the second week, the feed-use fermented beer grains (pH 3
,9) Approximately 720 kg was obtained.

This fermented product does not deteriorate even if stored outdoors for more than a year.
The palatability did not change and the storage stability was extremely good.

Effect of the invention The effects achieved by the present invention are as follows.

(1) Fermented beer lees can be obtained with extremely good shelf life (over 1 year) (2) Contains abundant useful metabolites produced by bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria, exhibits a refreshing sour odor, A fermented beer lees product having excellent palatability and nutritional value as feed can be obtained. The fermented product not only increases the milk yield and milk fat percentage for dairy cows, but also significantly improves the feed conversion rate of general economic animals such as cows and pigs.

(3) Moreover, it is extremely meaningful from an economic point of view, since beer lees, which is essentially waste, can be used effectively.

Claims (1)

[Claims] [1] In a method for producing a fermented beer lees for feed by anaerobically fermenting a fermented raw material containing beer lees, the moisture content of the fermented raw material is reduced to 45 to 75% (by weight), and the fermentation material is fermentable by bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria. Adjust the sugar content to 0.5% (weight) or more, add bifidobacteria and/or lactic acid bacteria so that the number of viable bacteria is 10^4 or more per 1 g of the fermentation raw material, and mix uniformly. A method for producing a fermented beer lees for feed, which comprises adjusting the apparent density of the resulting mixture to 0.6 (g/cm^3) or more and then fermenting it anaerobically.