Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T01:54:11.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The respiration rate and loss of dry matter from stored bran

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Douglas Snow
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
Norman C. Wright
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr

Extract

1. Experiments were made on the respiration of bran at different moisture levels using a continuous absorption apparatus in which the humidity of the air-stream was adjusted to be at equilibrium with the respiring bran. The rate of respiration was accelerated with increasing moisture content and was very rapid deterioration due to the high respiration rate and microbiological damage.

2. Experiments were made on the storage of bran at known moisture contents in closed tins in the laboratory and also in sacks kept under farm conditions. The total nitrogen content of the bran stored in the tins appeared to increase during storage. From similar increases in total phosphorus, it is clear that the increase in total nitrogen was caused by a loss of dry matter from the stored feeding stuff, a fact which was further demonstrated by the loss in dry weight of the sacks of bran with attributed to two causes: (1) the respiration of the plant cells still active in the bran itself, and (2) the respiration of developing micro-organisms. It is evident from these experiments that fresh bran, free from insect infestation and stored at a moisture content of less than 13%, will have a very low respiration rate and will, therefore, not be liable to heating. Bran of 15–19% moisture content respires at a much faster rate and the time for which such material can be stored with freedom from heating or other types of deterioration will be limited.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1945

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bailey, C. H. (1917). J. Amer. Soc. Agron. 9, 275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, C. H. (1921). Tech. Bull. Minn. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 3.Google Scholar
Bailey, C. H. (1940). Plant Physiol. 15, 257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, C. H. & Gurjar, A. M. (1918). J. Agric Res. 12, 685.Google Scholar
Bailey, C. H. & Gurjar, A. M. (1920). J. Biol. Chem. 44, 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, C. H. & Subbarow, T. (1925). J. Biol. Chem. 66, 375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilman, J. S. & Barron, D. M. (1930). Plant Physiol. 5, 565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatfield, I. (1931). J. Agric. Res. 42, 301.Google Scholar
James, L. M., Rettger, L. F. & Thom, C. (1928). J. Bact. 15, 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larmour, R. K., Clayton, J. S. & Wrenshall, C. L. (1935). Canad. J. Res. 12, 627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larmour, R. K., Sallans, M. R. & Craig, B. M. (1944). Canad. J. Res. F, 22, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latham, M. E. (1909). Bull. Torrey Bot. Cl. 36, 235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leach, W. (1942). Canad. J. Res. C, 20, 160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leach, W. (1943). Canad. J. Res. C, 21, 289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leach, W. (1944). Canad. J. Res. C, 22, 150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, W. McK. & Green, J. R. (1933). J. Industr. Engng Chem. (Anal, ed.), 5, 144.Google Scholar
Smith, M. J. & Bartz, J. P. (1932). Cereal Chem. 9, 393.Google Scholar
Snow, D., Crichton, M. H. G. & Wright, N. C. (1944). Ann. Appl. Biol. 31, 102, 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, D., Smith, J. A. B. & Wright, N. C. (1945). J. Agric. Sci. 35, 65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, H. M. (1926). Laboratory methods for maintaining constant humidities. Int. Grit. Tables, 1, 67. McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Swanson, C. O. (1935). Northw. Miller, 184, 12.Google Scholar
Truog, E. (1915). J. Industr. Engng Chem. 7, 1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar