'Shrink' losses in commercially sized corn silage piles: Quantifying total losses and where they occur

- Corn silage piles were used to measure 'shrink' from construction to feedout
- Shrink was wet weight, dry weight (oDM) and oDM volatiles corrected losses (vcoDM)
- Shrink was in silage mass prior to opening, from silage faces and face to feeding
- Shrink was low,
- Aerosol losses from corn silage are a lesser issue than commonly assumed

Silage 'shrink' (i.e., loss of fresh chopped crop between ensiling and feedout) represents a nutrient loss which can degrade air quality as volatile carbon compounds, degrade surface waterways due to seepage, or degrade aquifers due to seepage. Virtually no research has documented shrink in large silage piles. The term 'shrink' is often ill defined, but can be expressed as losses of wet weight (WW), oven dry matter (oDM), and oDM corrected for volatiles lost in the drying oven (vcoDM). Corn silage piles (4 wedge, 2 rollover/wedge, 1 bunker) from 950 to 12,204 tonnes as built, on concrete (4), soil (2) and a combination (1) in California's San Joaquin Valley, using a bacterial inoculant, covered within 24 h with an oxygen barrier inner film and black/white outer plastic, fed out using large front end loaders through an electronic feed tracking system, and from the 2013 crop year, were used. Shrink as WW, oDM and vcoDM were 90 ± 17, 68 ± 18 and 28 ± 21 g/kg, suggesting that much WW shrink is water and much oDM shrink is volatiles lost during analytical oven drying. Most shrink occurred in the silage mass with losses from exposed silage faces, as well as between exposed face silage removal and the total mixed ration mixer, being low. Silage bulk density, exposed silage face management and face use rate did not have obvious impacts on any shrink measure, but age of the silage pile during silage feedout impacted shrink losses ('older' silage piles being higher), but most strongly for WW shrink. Real shrink losses (i.e., vcoDM) of large well managed corn silage piles are low, the exposed silage face is a small portion of losses, and many proposed shrink mitigations appeared ineffective, possibly because shrink was low overall and they are largely directed at the exposed silage face.

87