<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article
  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.1/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.1" specific-use="sps-1.9" xml:lang="es" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
	<front>
		<journal-meta>
			<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">av</journal-id>
			<journal-title-group>
				<journal-title>Abanico veterinario</journal-title>
				<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">Abanico vet</abbrev-journal-title>
			</journal-title-group>
			<issn pub-type="ppub">2007-428X</issn>
			<issn pub-type="epub">2448-6132</issn>
			<publisher>
				<publisher-name>Sergio Martínez González</publisher-name>
			</publisher>
		</journal-meta>
		<article-meta>
			<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.21929/abavet2020.29</article-id>
			<article-id pub-id-type="other">00116</article-id>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>Artículos originales</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>Aprovechamiento de desechos de pescado y cáscara de piña para producir ensilado biológico</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Ramírez-Ramírez</surname>
						<given-names>José</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
					<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c1">*</xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0001-5020-7673</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Loya-Olguín</surname>
						<given-names>José</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-3749-3086</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Ulloa</surname>
						<given-names>José</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-4830-8755</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Rosas-Ulloa</surname>
						<given-names>Petra</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0003-2302-0437</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Gutiérrez-Leyva</surname>
						<given-names>Ranferi</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-7534-9712</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Silva-Carrillo</surname>
						<given-names>Yessica</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
			</contrib-group>
			<aff id="aff1">
				<label>1</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Unidad Académica de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit, Compostela, México</institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<city>Compostela</city>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="MX">Mexico</country>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff2">
				<label>2</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Posgrado en Ciencias Biológico Agropecuarias, Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit, Xalisco, México</institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<city>Xalisco</city>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="MX">Mexico</country>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff3">
				<label>3</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Centro de Tecnología de Alimentos, Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit, Tepic, México. </institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<city>Tepic</city>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="MX">Mexico</country>
			</aff>
			<author-notes>
				<corresp id="c1">*Autor responsable y de correspondencia: José Ramírez-Ramírez. <sup>1</sup>Unidad Académica de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit, Carretera Compostela-Chapalilla Km 3.5, Compostela Nayarit, México, C.P. 63700. (311) 1188478. <email>ramcara60@gmail.com</email>, <email>arulloa5@gmail.com</email>, <email>joselenin28@hotmail.com</email>, <email>petrosas@uan.edu.mx</email>, <email>granferi@hotmail.com</email>, <email>ysilvacarrillo@gmail.com</email>
				</corresp>
			</author-notes>
			<pub-date date-type="pub" publication-format="electronic">
				<day>30</day>
				<month>04</month>
				<year>2021</year>
			</pub-date>
			<pub-date date-type="collection" publication-format="electronic">
				<month>12</month>
				<year>2020</year>
			</pub-date>
			<volume>10</volume>		
			<elocation-id>e116</elocation-id>
			<history>
				<date date-type="received">
					<day>11</day>
					<month>07</month>
					<year>2020</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="accepted">
					<day>30</day>
					<month>10</month>
					<year>2020</year>
				</date>
			</history>
			<permissions>
				<license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/" xml:lang="es">
					<license-p>Este es un artículo publicado en acceso abierto bajo una licencia Creative Commons</license-p>
				</license>
			</permissions>
			<abstract>
				<title>RESUMEN</title>
				<p>Se formularon seis tratamientos para elaborar ensilado biológico con desechos de pescado, rastrojo de maíz, melaza, cáscara de piña (CP) [15, 30 y 45%] e inóculo <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp. o <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2. Los ensilados de cada tratamiento se hicieron por triplicado y se incubaron a 30°C durante 0, 2, 4, 7 y 14 días con el propósito de evaluar la acidificación bajo un diseño factorial 3 x 2 x 5. A los ensilados se les determinó la composición química y la digestibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de la materia seca (DIVMS) al terminar la fermentación. La acidificación más alta (p&lt;0.05) la presentaron los tratamientos con CP 15 y 30% y <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 a los 7 días. Con 15% de CP se obtuvo el mayor contenido de materia seca (39.3%) (p&lt;0.05) y la proteína cruda (26.5 a 31%, rango) fue igual (p&gt;0.05). La concentración mayor de lípidos (9.85%) se presentó en los tratamientos con CP 30 y 45% y <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2. Las fracciones de fibra detergente disminuyeron al aumentar el nivel de CP y la DIVMS más alta (82.9%) se presentó en los ensilados al utilizar <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2, independientemente del nivel de CP (p&lt;0.05). Los ensilados obtenidos son una alternativa para alimentación de rumiantes.</p>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="es">
				<title>Palabras clave:</title>
				<kwd>Desechos de pescado</kwd>
				<kwd>cáscara de piña</kwd>
				<kwd>ensilado biológico</kwd>
				<kwd>alimentación de rumiantes</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
			<counts>
				<fig-count count="0"/>
				<table-count count="8"/>
				<equation-count count="0"/>
				<ref-count count="22"/>
				<page-count count="0"/>
			</counts>
		</article-meta>
	</front>
	<body>
		<sec sec-type="intro">
			<title>INTRODUCCIÓN</title>
			<p>La producción pesquera mundial en 2016 alcanzó aproximadamente 171 millones de ton, de los cuales la acuicultura representó un 47% del total y la pesca 53%, sin incluir lo destinado a la producción de harina y aceite de pescado (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">FAO, 2018</xref>). Del procesamiento industrial del pescado derivan más de 60% de residuos constituidos por aletas, escamas, cabezas, vísceras, esqueleto, piel, huevas y restos de carne (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Ghosh <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Renuka <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>). Esos desechos en muchas partes del mundo son descartados, lo cual causa una gran pérdida de nutrientes como proteínas, lípidos y minerales, además de contaminar el ambiente (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Olsen y Toppe, 2017</xref>). Con los desechos de pescado se pueden producir fertilizantes, concentrados e hidrolizados de proteína, así como harina y aceite de pescado (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Renuka <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Ozyurt <italic>et al</italic>., 2017)</xref>. También se han desarrollado biotécnicas para la conversión de los desechos de pescado en productos de alto valor como ácidos grasos poliinsaturados, péptidos fisiológicamente importantes, carbohidratos y otros compuestos bioactivos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Smichi <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>). Sin embargo, la mayoría de esas tecnologías no son económicamente atractivas debido a que requieren alta inversión (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Ozyurt <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>). El insumo de mayor importancia en producción animal es la harina de pescado por su alto contenido proteico, pero debido a su alto costo en el mercado se demandan fuentes alternas de proteína (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>). El ensilado de pescado es un producto resultante de la preservación de pescado completo o partes por la adición de ácidos orgánicos o inorgánicos (ensilado químico) o por fermentación bacteriana (ensilado biológico) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Olsen y Toppe, 2017</xref>). El ensilado de pescado producido por el método biológico es una alternativa tecnológica viable desde el punto de vista económico y ambiental, el cual consiste en mezclar el desecho de pescado molido con melaza u otra fuente de carbohidratos y un cultivo iniciador de bacterias ácido lácticas (BAL) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>). Durante la fermentación las BAL incrementan la producción de ácidos, principalmente láctico, por lo que el pH disminuye y se frena el deterioro microbiano; además las proteasas del pescado se activan, aceleran la proteólisis y por consecuencia la digestibilidad del producto aumenta (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>). Así mismo, las BAL generan compuestos tales como bacteriocinas y peróxido de hidrógeno que ayudan a la conservación y diacetilo, sustancia potenciadora de aroma y sabor (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Jini <italic>et al</italic>., 2011</xref>). En ese sentido, para lograr el control de la fermentación es importante la selección de cepas de BAL. Según diversos estudios, el ensilado de pescado es una fuente excelente de proteínas, lípidos y minerales con grandes propiedades biológicas para alimentación animal (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Land <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>), además el ensilado biológico de pescado presenta beneficios antibacterianos, antioxidantes y es una fuente posible de probióticos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Jini <italic>et al</italic>., 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Ozyurt <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>). Por otra parte, la piña (<italic>Annanas comosus</italic> Merr.) ocupa el tercer lugar como la fruta más popular y de mayor importancia económica en el mundo, con una producción de 24’785,762 ton (FAOSTAT, 2018). De la industrialización de la piña se obtiene aproximadamente un 75% del peso del fruto como desechos, los cuales son una fuente valiosa de fibra, azúcares solubles, proteína, ácido ascórbico, vitaminas, minerales, agua y de compuestos bioactivos como la bromelina de múltiples aplicaciones (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Damasceno <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Ketnawa <italic>et al</italic>., 2012</xref>). Los desechos de piña pueden utilizarse como sustrato de buena calidad para los microorganismos en procesos fermentativos; sin embargo, muchas veces son tirados causando serios problemas de contaminación (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Ketnawa <italic>et al., 2012</italic></xref><italic>)</italic>. Por todo lo anterior, el aprovechamiento de los desechos de pescado y piña podría ser una alternativa viable y relevante desde el punto de vista económico y ambiental. Hasta donde llega nuestro conocimiento no hay reportes sobre el uso de desechos de pescado y cáscara de piña juntos. Por lo tanto, el objetivo de la presente investigación fue evaluar el aprovechamiento de esos desechos industriales en la producción de ensilados por fermentación láctica. </p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="materials|methods">
			<title>MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS</title>
			<p>Preparación de la materia prima </p>
			<p><italic>Desechos de pescado y cáscara de piña</italic></p>
			<p>Se obtuvieron desechos de pescado de especies marinas comerciales tales como <italic>Bagre panamensis</italic>, <italic>Peprilus snyderi</italic>, <italic>Sphyraena ensis</italic>, <italic>Trachynotus ovatus</italic>, <italic>Argyrosomus regius</italic>, <italic>Diplodus vulgaris</italic> y <italic>Bagre panamensis</italic> (pescado estuarino) del puerto de San Blas, Nayarit, México. Los desechos fueron procesados en un molino para carne (Marca Torrey, modelo 32-3, México) usando el cedazo de 0.5 cm de diámetro y se almacenaron a -20°C hasta su uso. La cáscara de piña (<italic>Annanas comosus</italic> Merr.) variedad Cayena lisa se obtuvo manualmente con cuchillo y se molió homogéneamente en un procesador de alimentos. En la <xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">tabla</xref> siguiente se presenta la composición química de dichos ingredientes. </p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t1">
					<label>Tabla 1</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Composición química (% de MS) de desechos de pescado y cáscara de piña.</title>
					</caption>
					<table>
						<colgroup>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
						</colgroup>
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th align="center">Componente</th>
								<th align="center">Derechos de pescado</th>
								<th align="center">Cáscara de piña</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Materia seca</td>
								<td align="center">29.72 ± 0.4</td>
								<td align="center">23.22 ± 0.37</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Cenizas</td>
								<td align="center">18.94 ± 0.52</td>
								<td align="center">4.11 ± 0.12</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Proteína cruda (Nt x 6.25)</td>
								<td align="center">52.43 ± 0.92</td>
								<td align="center">4.31 ± 0.13</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Extracto etéreo</td>
								<td align="center">24.50 ± 0.67</td>
								<td align="center">3.38 ± 0.46</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Fibra cruda</td>
								<td align="center">---</td>
								<td align="center">13.95 ± 0.55</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Fibra neutro detergente</td>
								<td align="center">---</td>
								<td align="center">41.60 ± 1.10</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Fibra ácido detergente</td>
								<td align="center">---</td>
								<td align="center">22.71 ± 0.73</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">ELN</td>
								<td align="center">4.13</td>
								<td align="center">74.25</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN1">
							<p>Media ± desviación estándar, n = 3. ELN = 100 - % de cenizas -% de proteína cruda -% de lípidos -% de fibra cruda.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>Melaza de caña y rastrojo de maíz </p>
			<p>Se utilizó melaza de caña de un contenido de humedad de 25.15%, 10.37% de cenizas y 55.73% de carbohidratos solubles totales. Para mejorar la consistencia de los ensilados se adicionó rastrojo de maíz procesado en un molino de cuchillas usando la criba de 2 mm (Willey, model 4, Philadelphia, USA). </p>
			<p>Inóculos </p>
			<p>Fueron evaluadas las cepas de <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 y <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp., siendo esta última aislada de desechos de mango en nuestro laboratorio. Los iniciadores se cultivaron en caldo MRS (de Man Rogosa and Sharpe, MRS, Merck Darmstadt) a 30 °C por 24 h hasta registrar una concentración final de 1 X 10<sup>9</sup> ufc/mL. </p>
			<p>Producción de los ensilados</p>
			<p> Se prepararon seis tratamientos con diferentes cantidades en proporción porcentual de desechos de pescado, CP (15, 30 y 45%, p/p), rastrojo de maíz, melaza de caña (9%, p/p). Como inóculo (I) se utilizó <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp. o <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 al 4% (v/p) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">Tabla 2</xref>). Las mezclas obtenidas se utilizaron para elaborar mini silos de 100 g en bolsas de plástico color negro. Cada tratamiento se preparó por triplicado y los silos se sellaron a vacío e incubaron a 30 °C durante 14 días. </p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t2">
					<label>Tabla 2.-Composición</label>
					<caption>
						<title>porcentual de ingredientes utilizados en la producción de los ensilados por fermentación ácido láctica.</title>
					</caption>
					<table>
						<colgroup>
							<col/>
							<col span="6"/>
						</colgroup>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Ingredientes</td>
								<td align="center" colspan="6">Porcentage </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Desechos de pescado</td>
								<td align="center">57</td>
								<td align="center">47</td>
								<td align="center">37</td>
								<td align="center">57</td>
								<td align="center">47</td>
								<td align="center">37</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Cáscara de piña</td>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">45</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Melaza</td>
								<td align="center">9</td>
								<td align="center">9</td>
								<td align="center">9</td>
								<td align="center">9</td>
								<td align="center">9</td>
								<td align="center">9</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Rastrojo de maíz</td>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">10</td>
								<td align="center">5</td>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">10</td>
								<td align="center">5</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="justify">Inóculo</td>
								<td align="center">4A</td>
								<td align="center">4A</td>
								<td align="center">4A</td>
								<td align="center">4B</td>
								<td align="center">4B</td>
								<td align="center">4B</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN2">
							<p>A= <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp aislado de desechos de mango. B= <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>Análisis químico </p>
			<p>Los ensilados se analizaron cada 0, 2, 4, 7 y 14 días (T) para determinar el pH con
				un potenciómetro modelo UB10 Ultra Basic (Denver Instrument, USA) y el contenido de
				ácido láctico por titulación. Los ensilados obtenidos al tiempo final de la
				fermentación se analizaron para determinar su composición química proximal (<xref
					ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">AOAC, 2005</xref>) y los contenidos de fibra neutro
				detergente (FND) y fibra ácido detergente (FAD) por el método de <xref
					ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Van Soest <italic>et al</italic>. (1991)</xref>. </p>
			<p>Digestibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de la materia seca (DIVMS) </p>
			<p>La DIVMS se determinó siguiendo la técnica de dos pasos de <xref ref-type="bibr"
					rid="B20">Tilley y Terry (1963)</xref>. Las muestras de ensilado se secaron a 70
				ºC por 24 h en un horno de aire forzado y se procesaron en un molino Wiley a un
				tamaño de partícula de 1 mm. Para colectar el líquido ruminal se usaron dos borregos
				Blackbelly sin castrar de 35 Kg de peso corporal y equipados con cánula en el rumen.
				Los ovinos se alimentaron con una dieta a base de 25% de ensilado de maíz, 25% de
				alfalfa y 50% de concentrado. En el segundo paso de la técnica de DIVMS se utilizó
				pepsina (Sigma P-7012, Sigma). </p>
			<p>Análisis estadístico </p>
			<p>Los datos de los parámetros fermentativos fueron tratados por análisis de varianza
				(ANDEVA) para un diseño factorial 3 x 2 x 5 (nivel de cáscara de piña x inóculo x
				tiempo de fermentación). Los datos obtenidos de la composición química y DIVMS se
				analizaron por ANDEVA para un diseño factorial 3 x 2 (nivel de cáscara de piña x
				inóculo). Al encontrarse diferencia significativa, las medias de los tratamientos
				fueron comparadas con la prueba de Tukey (p&lt;0.05). El análisis se hizo con el
				programa Statistica 7. (Statistica, versión 7.1). </p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="results|discussion">
			<title>RESULTADOS Y DISCUSIÓN</title>
			<p>Parámetros fermentativos </p>
			<p>El contenido de ácido láctico de los ensilados presentó diferencias significativas
				entre tratamientos debido a los factores inóculo (I) y tiempo de fermentación (T)
					(<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Tabla 3</xref>). Las mezclas sin fermentar
				presentaron el contenido más bajo de ácido láctico (promedio 0.55 ± 0.15%) sin
				existir diferencia entre esos tratamientos (p&gt;0.05). Sin embargo, entre los días
				2 y 7 del proceso, la mayoría de los tratamientos con <italic>Lactobacillus</italic>
				B2 presentaron la concentración máxima de ácido láctico (promedio 3.42 ± 0.17%). El
				alto poder acidificante de <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 se ha reportado
				anteriormente (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et
						al</italic>., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">2018</xref>) y en
				este trabajo se reafirma. Los resultados obtenidos concuerdan con valores de 2.96 a
				4.42% de ácido láctico reportados recientemente para ensilado biológico adicionado
				con mezclas de desechos de pescado y mango (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16"
					>Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>), así como con los valores
				de 2.96 y 3.08% de ácido láctico para ensilados fermentados de cabeza de langostino
				y residuos de pescado; respectivamente (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo
						<italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>). </p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t3">
					<label>Tabla 3</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Efecto del nivel de cáscara de piña, inóculo y tiempo de fermentación sobre el contenido de ácido láctico y pH de los ensilados.</title>
					</caption>
					<table>
						<colgroup>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
						</colgroup>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">Nivel de cáscara de piña (CP) (%)</td>
								<td align="center">Inóculo (I)</td>
								<td align="left">Tiempo de fermentación (T) (días)</td>
								<td align="center">Ácido láctico (%)</td>
								<td align="center">pH</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">0</td>
								<td align="center">0.49 ± 0.08c</td>
								<td align="center">6.09 ± 0.05a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">0</td>
								<td align="center">0.43 ± 0.01c</td>
								<td align="center">6.05 ± 0.14a</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">0</td>
								<td align="center">0.55 ± 0.02c</td>
								<td align="center">5.83 ± 0.01b</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">0</td>
								<td align="center">0.73 ± 0.03c</td>
								<td align="center">5.60 ± 0.10c</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">0</td>
								<td align="center">0.37 ± 0.14c</td>
								<td align="center">5.44 ± 0.25c</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">0</td>
								<td align="center">0.72 ± 0.07c</td>
								<td align="center">5.32 ± 0.28c</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">2</td>
								<td align="center">2.97 ± 0.45b</td>
								<td align="center">4.62 ± 0.03e</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">2</td>
								<td align="center">3.37 ± 0.05<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.65 ± 0.07<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">2</td>
								<td align="center">2.71 ± 0.25<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.64 ± 0.05<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">2</td>
								<td align="center">3.32 ± 0.21<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.52 ± 0.05<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">2</td>
								<td align="center">2.98 ± 0.41<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.36 ± 0.09<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">2</td>
								<td align="center">3.14 ± 0.15<sup>ab</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.51 ± 0.05<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">4</td>
								<td align="center">3.09 ± 0.61<sup>ab</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.69 ± 0.15<sup>de</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">4</td>
								<td align="center">3.57 ± 0.06<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.63 ± 0.04<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">4</td>
								<td align="center">2.78 ± 0.14<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.65 ± 0.03<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">4</td>
								<td align="center">3.79 ± 0.34<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.49 ± 0.01<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">4</td>
								<td align="center">2.98 ± 0.41<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.44 ± 0.05<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">4</td>
								<td align="center">3.49 ± 0.25<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.56 ± 0.04<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">7</td>
								<td align="center">2.77 ± 0.28<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.77 ± 0.04<sup>d</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">7</td>
								<td align="center">3.32 ± 0.47<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.68 ± 0.16<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">7</td>
								<td align="center">2.49 ± 0.14<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.82 ± 0.03<sup>d</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">7</td>
								<td align="center">3.31 ± 0.33<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.50 ± 0.11<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">7</td>
								<td align="center">3.44 ± 0.12<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.43 ± 0.01<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">7</td>
								<td align="center">3.47 ± 0.13<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.50 ± 0.15<sup>e</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">14</td>
								<td align="center">2.34 ± 0.74<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.89 ± 0.06<sup>d</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">14</td>
								<td align="center">2.76 ± 0.04<sub>b</sub></td>
								<td align="center">4.68 ± 0.21<sub>e</sub></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">14</td>
								<td align="center">2.61 ± 0.26<sub>b</sub></td>
								<td align="center">4.77 ± 0.06<sub>d</sub></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">14</td>
								<td align="center">2.83 ± 0.55<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.83 ± 0.03<sup>d</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">1</td>
								<td align="center">2.82 ± 0.31<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.82 ± 0.06<sup>d</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">14</td>
								<td align="center">2.93 ± 0.44<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">4.77 ± 0.05<sup>d</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Efecto</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center" colspan="2">Valor de p</td>
								
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">CP</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center">0.24</td>
								<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">I</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
								<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">T</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
								<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">CP x I</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center">0.12</td>
								<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">CP x T</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center">0.17</td>
								<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">I x T</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center">0.15</td>
								<td align="center">0.24</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">CP x I x T</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center">0.57</td>
								<td align="center">0.09</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN3">
							<p>A= <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp, aislado de desechos de mango. </p>
						</fn>
						<fn id="TFN4">
							<p>B= <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2. </p>
						</fn>
						<fn id="TFN5">
							<p>a,b,c,d,e: Medias en la misma columna con diferente superíndice presentan diferencia significativa (p&lt;0.05).</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>El pH fue afectado significativamente por los factores principales, nivel de cáscara de piña (CP), inóculo (I) y tiempo de fermentación (T); confirmándose las interacciones CP x I y CP x T (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Tabla 3</xref>). Las mezclas sin fermentar presentaron los valores más altos de pH y al aumentar el nivel de CP hubo un descenso de dicho parámetro (p&lt;0.05). En los ensilados se observó que al aumentar la producción de ácido láctico el pH disminuyó significativamente, obteniéndose los mejores valores de pH entre los días 2 y 7 de fermentación (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Tabla 3</xref>), lo cual se debe a que las BAL alcanzan la cima de la curva de crecimiento. Sin embargo, la interacción CP x I mostró que a los 7 días del proceso el pH de los tratamientos con 15 y 30% de CP e inoculados con <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 fue mejor que con <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp, lo cual también se observó de forma similar a los 14 días en los ensilados con 15% de CP. El pH de los ensilados fue afectado por la interacción CP x T durante los 0, 7 y 15 días del proceso (p&lt;0.05). Sin embargo, entre 2 y 4 días de fermentación los valores de pH de los ensilados no presentaron diferencias significativas, independientemente del nivel de CP y del tipo de inóculo (p&lt;0.05). Los tratamientos con 30 y 45% de CP a los 14 días de fermentación mostraron un pequeño aumento en el pH, lo cual estuvo relacionado con un descenso de 0.72 unidades porcentuales en la producción de ácido láctico. El incremento del pH se debió al efecto amortiguador de las proteínas del pescado y péptidos derivados de su hidrólisis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013)</xref>, así como también a la alta cantidad de cenizas que aportan los huesos de los desechos de pescado (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">Tablas 2</xref> y <xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">4)</xref>, puesto que las sales de calcio actúan como neutralizantes del ácido láctico de los ensilados durante su almacenamiento (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Land <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>) . </p>
			<p>Sin embargo, los ensilados obtenidos en este estudio presentaron características sensoriales aceptables y sin mostrar signos de descomposición. Los valores de pH de los ensilados de este estudio concuerdan con el de otros reportes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>), aunque resultaron superiores al de 4.2 obtenido para ensilado biológico de residuos del fileteado de tilapia (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Gerón <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>) . </p>
			<p>Composición química </p>
			<p>En la <xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">Tabla 4</xref> se muestran los resultados de la composición química y DIVMS de los ensilados obtenidos a los 14 días de fermentación. El contenido de materia seca (MS) disminuyó significativamente al aumentar el nivel de CP, por lo cual los ensilados con 45% de CP presentaron el contenido más bajo de MS, independientemente de la cepa inoculante (p&lt;0.05). Los ensilados con 15% de CP presentaron los valores más altos de MS (39.3%), a pesar de tener en su formulación un alto contenido de desechos de pescado (57%), cuyo porcentaje de humedad es alto (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Tablas 1</xref>, <xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">2</xref> y <xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">4</xref>). Lo anterior seguramente se debió por la adición de 15% de rastrojo de maíz, lo que también mejoró la consistencia de los ensilados. Los resultados de MS obtenidos concuerdan con los de otros reportes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>; Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018). El nivel de CP y la interacción CP x I fueron significativos en el contenido de cenizas. Los ensilados con 15% de CP e inoculados con <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp. presentaron el contenido más alto (14.5%) de cenizas (p&lt;0.05), sin embargo, los demás tratamientos presentaron una buena concentración de minerales, debido a que los desechos de pescado son una fuente importante de esos nutrientes <xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Tablas (1</xref> y <xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">4)</xref>. El contenido de cenizas obtenido es similar a los resultados de otras investigaciones (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>), aunque fueron inferiores a 18.7% reportado por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>. (2007)</xref>. </p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t4">
					<label>Tabla 4</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Efecto del nivel de cáscara de piña e inóculo sobre la composición química proximal, fibra neutro detergente (FND), fibra ácido detergente (FAD) y digestibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de la materia seca (DIVMS) de los ensilados.</title>
					</caption>
					<table>
						<colgroup>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
						</colgroup>
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th align="center">Cáscara de piña (CP)</th>
								<th align="center">Inóculo (I)</th>
								<th align="center">Materia seca (%)</th>
								<th align="center">Cenizas (%)</th>
								<th align="center">Proteína cruda (%)</th>
								<th align="center">Extracto etéreo (%)</th>
								<th align="center">FND (%)</th>
								<th align="center">FAD (%)</th>
								<th align="center">DIVMS (%)</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">39.6±0.7<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">14.5±0.6<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">27.5±1.5<sup>ab</sup></td>
								<td align="center">6.0±0.7<sup>c</sup></td>
								<td align="center">39.7±3.3<sup></sup>a</td>
								<td align="center">22.1±0.9<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">76.8±1.7<sup>b</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">35.1±0.5<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">11.7± 0.3<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">26.5±1.9<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">5.2±0.6<sup>c</sup></td>
								<td align="center">41.9±2.4<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">22.7±1.7<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">76.2 ±1.1<sup>b</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">A</td>
								<td align="center">28.5±1.3<sup>c</sup></td>
								<td align="center">12.5± 0.5<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">26.7±0.9<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">5.7±0.5<sup>c</sup></td>
								<td align="center">32.1±0.7<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">17.9±1.6<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">82.6±0.5<sup>a</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">15</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">39.0±1.4<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">12.8±0.2<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">29.7±0.8<sup>ab</sup></td>
								<td align="center">8.0±1.0<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">37.5±2.4<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">21.6±2.0<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">80.6±0.3<sup>a</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">30</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">33.5±0.5<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">12.3± 1.4<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">27.8±3.0<sup>ab</sup></td>
								<td align="center">9.7±0.8<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">35.7±1.6<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">24.6±1.5<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">84.4±3<sup>a</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">45</td>
								<td align="center">B</td>
								<td align="center">28.9±1.5<sup>c</sup></td>
								<td align="center">12.9±0.7<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">31.0±3.6<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">10.0±0.8<sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">28.0±0.9<sup>c</sup></td>
								<td align="center">18.4±0.8<sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">83.8±2.1<sup>a</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Efecto valor de p</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">CP</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
								<td align="center">0.01</td>
								<td align="center">0.369</td>
								<td align="center">0.021</td>
								<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
								<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
								<td align="center">0.03</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Inóculo</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center">0.26</td>
								<td align="center">0.51</td>
								<td align="center">.028</td>
								<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
								<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
								<td align="center">0.39</td>
								<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">CP x Inóculo</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center">0.33</td>
								<td align="center">0.04</td>
								<td align="center">0.52</td>
								<td align="center">0.30</td>
								<td align="center">0.97</td>
								<td align="center">0.42</td>
								<td align="center">0.08</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN6">
							<p>A= <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp., aislado de desechos de mango. </p>
						</fn>
						<fn id="TFN7">
							<p>B= <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2. </p>
						</fn>
						<fn id="TFN8">
							<p>a,b,c: Valores con letra distinta en cada columna difieren estadísticamente (p&lt;0.05).</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>Los ensilados mostraron diferencia significativa en el contenido de proteína cruda debido al tipo de inóculo utilizado. Los ensilados con 45% de CP e inoculados con <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 presentaron numéricamente el contenido de proteína cruda más alto (31%), pero estadísticamente el nivel de CP y el inóculo no produjeron cambios relevantes en la proteína cruda de los ensilados (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">Tabla 4</xref>). El contenido de proteína cruda de los ensilados obtenidos con 45% de CP y <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 coincide con un 31.6% de ensilado biológico de desechos de tilapia (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>), aunque fue superior a 28.08% de proteína cruda de ensilado biológico de desechos de pescado y mango (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>); sin embargo, fue inferior a 35.42% reportado por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>. (2019</xref>) para ensilado biológico de residuos de pescado, melaza y yogurt. El extracto etéreo de los ensilados presentó diferencia significativa debido a los efectos principales. Al respecto, los tratamientos con 30 y 45% de CP e inoculados con <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 mostraron el contenido más alto de lípidos (9.85%), lo cual es muy importante desde el punto de vista nutricional, ya que en ellos se encuentran ácidos grasos esenciales para la alimentación animal (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Vidotti <italic>et al</italic>., 2011</xref>). Los resultados de extracto etéreo de este estudio son inferiores a los reportados por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>. (2007)</xref> y <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>. (2019)</xref>; sin embargo, coinciden con los hallazgos de otro estudio (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>). Los contenidos de FND y FAD disminuyeron al aumentar el nivel de CP. Aunque la CP es una buena fuente de fibra (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Tabla 1</xref>), la tendencia en los resultados se debió a la adición de rastrojo de maíz en la fórmula, ya que los ensilados con mayor contenido de CP a la vez contenían menor cantidad de rastrojo de maíz y por tanto menos contenido de FND y FAD (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">Tablas 2</xref> y <xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">4</xref>). En ese sentido, los resultados son muy importantes, ya que los contenidos de FND y FAD en los forrajes están correlacionados negativamente con el consumo y la digestibilidad. Los porcentajes de FND y FAD obtenidos en los ensilados del presente estudio fueron superiores a los reportados por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>. (2018)</xref>. </p>
			<p>Digestibilidad <italic>in vitro</italic> de la materia seca (DIVMS) </p>
			<p>Los valores de digestibilidad de componentes alimenticios son parámetros importantes
				para evaluar la formulación de las dietas y para determinar la utilización de un
				componente alimenticio (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Ozyurt <italic>et
						al</italic>., 2017</xref>). Los valores de DIVMS de los ensilados
				presentaron un rango de 76.2 a 84.4% con diferencias significativas entre
				tratamientos debido a los efectos principales (p&lt;0.05). Al aumentar el nivel de
				CP a 45% y con la adición de <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp., los ensilados
				presentaron un incrementó de 6.1 unidades porcentuales en la DIVMS para alcanzar
				82.6% (p&lt;0.05). Sin embargo, ese resultado fue estadísticamente igual al utilizar
					<italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2, independientemente del nivel de CP (<xref
					ref-type="table" rid="t4">Tabla 4</xref>). En la producción de ensilado de
				pescado, las proteasas presentes en el medio ácido hidrolizan las proteínas en
				fragmentos más pequeñas, péptidos y aminoácidos, lo cual afecta a la digestibilidad
				total (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>;
					<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>; <xref
					ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>;
					<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Olsen y Toppe, 2017</xref>). El efecto del nivel
				de CP sobre el aumento en la DIVMS se debió probablemente a un aumento en la
				disponibilidad de nutrientes, lo cual estuvo relacionado con el descenso en las
				fracciones de fibra y por consecuencia incrementó la actividad microbiana ruminal.
				Así mismo, la adición de CP probablemente aumentó la actividad de la pepsina
				utilizada en el segundo paso de la prueba de digestibilidad, lo cual simula la
				digestión estomacal y por tanto la DIVMS de los ensilados aumentó. Las BAL son mejor
				conocidas como cultivos iniciadores debido a sus características metabólicas
				versátiles tales como actividad acidificante, actividad proteolítica y síntesis de
				bacteriocinas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Jini <italic>et al</italic>.,
					2011</xref>). En general, la DIVMS de los ensilados fue mayor con
					<italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 que con <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp.,
				debido al mejor poder acidificante de <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 y
				probablemente a una alta capacidad productora de enzimas digestivas. Los resultados
				de DIVMS obtenidos en este trabajo concuerdan con los de otros reportes (<xref
					ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Ozyurt <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>; <xref
					ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>.,
				2018</xref>).</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="conclusions">
			<title>CONCLUSIONES</title>
			<p>La inclusión de cáscara de piña en un 15 y 30% y <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 causó la mejor acidificación de los ensilados a 7 días de fermentación. Sin embargo, a los 14 días todos los ensilados fueron estables y presentaron alto contenido de nutrientes. Además, el uso de <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2, independientemente del nivel de cáscara de piña produjo la más alta DIVMS de los ensilados. La producción de ensilados con desechos de pescado y cáscara de piña en combinación con melaza y rastrojo de maíz es una alternativa tecnológica sencilla, económica y amigable con el ambiente. Se recomienda realizar el escalamiento del proceso de producción y evaluar los ensilados en la alimentación de rumiantes.</p>
		</sec>
	</body>
	<back>
		<ack>
			<title>AGRADECIMIENTOS </title>
			<p>Los autores agradecen la asistencia técnica del MVZ Francisco Arce Romero, Unidad Académica de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit, México.</p>
		</ack>
		<ref-list>
			<title>LITERATURA CITADA</title>
			<ref id="B1">
				<mixed-citation>AOAC (ASSOCIATION OF OFFICIAL ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS). 2005. <italic>Official Methods of Analysis of the AOAC</italic>. 18ed. AOAC International, Gaithersburg, MD, USA. ISBN 0-935584-77-3. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.eoma.aoac.org/">http://www.eoma.aoac.org/</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<collab>AOAC (ASSOCIATION OF OFFICIAL ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS)</collab>
					</person-group>
					<year>2005</year>
					<source>Official Methods of Analysis of the AOAC</source>
					<edition>18</edition>
					<publisher-name>AOAC International, Gaithersburg</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>MD, USA</publisher-loc>
					<isbn>0-935584-77-3</isbn>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.eoma.aoac.org/">http://www.eoma.aoac.org/</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B2">
				<mixed-citation>CASTILLO,, GWE, Sánchez, SHA, Ochoa, MGM. 2019. Evaluación del ensilado de residuos de pescado y de cabeza de langostino fermentado con <italic>Lactobacillus fermentus</italic> aislado de cerdo. <italic>Revista de investigaciones Veterinarias del Perú</italic>. 30(4):1456-1469. ISSN: 1609-9117. http://dx.doi.org/10.15381/rivep.v30i4.17165 </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>CASTILLO</surname>
							<given-names>GWE</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sánchez</surname>
							<given-names>SHA</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ochoa</surname>
							<given-names>MGM</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2019</year>
					<article-title>Evaluación del ensilado de residuos de pescado y de cabeza de langostino fermentado con Lactobacillus fermentus aislado de cerdo</article-title>
					<source>Revista de investigaciones Veterinarias del Perú</source>
					<volume>30</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>1456</fpage>
					<lpage>1469</lpage>
					<issn>1609-9117</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15381/rivep.v30i4.17165</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B3">
				<mixed-citation>DAMASCENO, KA, Alvarenga, CA, Dos Santos, G, Lacerda, L, Bastianello, PC, Leal, P, Arantes-Pereira, L. 2016. Development of cereal bars containing pineapple peel flour (<italic>Annanas Comosus</italic> L. Merril). <italic>Journal of Food Quality</italic>. 39:417-424. ISSN: 1745-4557. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfq.12222 </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>DAMASCENO</surname>
							<given-names>KA</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Alvarenga</surname>
							<given-names>CA</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Dos Santos</surname>
							<given-names>G</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Lacerda</surname>
							<given-names>L</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bastianello</surname>
							<given-names>PC</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Leal</surname>
							<given-names>P</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Arantes-Pereira</surname>
							<given-names>L</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>Development of cereal bars containing pineapple peel flour (Annanas Comosus L. Merril)</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Food Quality</source>
					<volume>39</volume>
					<fpage>417</fpage>
					<lpage>424</lpage>
					<issn>1745-4557</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/jfq.12222</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B4">
				<mixed-citation>FAO (Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura) 2018. <italic>El estado mundial de la pesca y la acuicultura 2018</italic>. <italic>Cumplir los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible</italic>. Roma. Licencia: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Pp. 2. ISBN 978-92-5-130688-8.<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.fao.org/3/I9540ES/i9540es.pdf">http://www.fao.org/3/I9540ES/i9540es.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<collab>FAO (Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura)</collab>
					</person-group>
					<year>2018</year>
					<source>El estado mundial de la pesca y la acuicultura 2018. Cumplir los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible</source>
					<publisher-loc>Roma</publisher-loc>
					<fpage>2</fpage>
					<lpage>2</lpage>
					<isbn>978-92-5-130688-8</isbn>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.fao.org/3/I9540ES/i9540es.pdf">http://www.fao.org/3/I9540ES/i9540es.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B5">
				<mixed-citation>FAOSTAT (Statistical Database of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2018. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC">http://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="webpage">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<collab>FAOSTAT (Statistical Database of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations)</collab>
					</person-group>
					<year>2018</year>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC">http://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B6">
				<mixed-citation>GERON, LJV, Zeoula, LM, Vidotti, RM, Matsushita, M, Kazama, R, Caldas, SF, Fareli, F. 2007. Chemical characterization, dry matter and crude protein ruminal degradability and <italic>in vitro</italic> intestinal digestion of acid and fermented silage from tilapia filleting residue. <italic>Animal Feed Science and Technology</italic>. 136:226-239. ISSN: 0377-8401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.09.006 </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>GERON</surname>
							<given-names>LJV</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Zeoula</surname>
							<given-names>LM</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Vidotti</surname>
							<given-names>RM</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Matsushita</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Kazama</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Caldas</surname>
							<given-names>SF</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Fareli</surname>
							<given-names>F</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2007</year>
					<article-title>Chemical characterization, dry matter and crude protein ruminal degradability and in vitro intestinal digestion of acid and fermented silage from tilapia filleting residue</article-title>
					<source>Animal Feed Science and Technology</source>
					<volume>136</volume>
					<fpage>226</fpage>
					<lpage>239</lpage>
					<issn>0377-8401</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.09.006</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B7">
				<mixed-citation>GHALY, AE, Ramakrishnan, VV, BroOKS, MS, Budge, SM, Dave, D. 2013. Fish Processing Wastes as a Potential Source of Proteins, Amino Acids and Oils: A Critical Review. <italic>Journal of Microbial and Biochemical Technology</italic>. 5(4):107-129. ISSN: 1948-5948. http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/1948-5948.1000110 </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>GHALY</surname>
							<given-names>AE</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ramakrishnan</surname>
							<given-names>VV</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Brooks</surname>
							<given-names>MS</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Budge</surname>
							<given-names>SM</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Dave</surname>
							<given-names>D</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2013</year>
					<article-title>Fish Processing Wastes as a Potential Source of Proteins, Amino Acids and Oils: A Critical Review</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Microbial and Biochemical Technology.</source>
					<volume>5</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>107</fpage>
					<lpage>129</lpage>
					<issn>1948-5948</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4172/1948-5948.1000110</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B8">
				<mixed-citation>GHOSH, PR, Fawcett, D, Sharma, SB, Poinern, GEJ. 2016. Progress towards sustainable utilization and management of food wastes in the global economy. <italic>International Journal of Food Science</italic>. 2016:1-22. ISSN: 2314-5765. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/ijfs/2016/3563478.pdf">http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/ijfs/2016/3563478.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>GHOSH</surname>
							<given-names>PR</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Fawcett</surname>
							<given-names>D</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sharma</surname>
							<given-names>SB</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Poinern</surname>
							<given-names>GEJ</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>Progress towards sustainable utilization and management of food wastes in the global economy</article-title>
					<source>International Journal of Food Science</source>
					<volume>2016</volume>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>22</lpage>
					<issn>2314-5765</issn>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/ijfs/2016/3563478.pdf">http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/ijfs/2016/3563478.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B9">
				<mixed-citation>JINI, R, Swapna, HC, Amit, KR, Vrinda, R, Halami, PM, Sachindra, NM, Bhaskar, N. 2011. Isolation and characterization of potential lactic acid bacteria (LAB) from freshwater fish processing wastes for application in fermentative utilization of fish processing waste. <italic>Brazilian Journal of Microbiology</italic>. 42:1516-1525. ISSN: 1517-8382. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1517-83822011000400039 </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>JINI</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Swapna</surname>
							<given-names>HC</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Amit</surname>
							<given-names>KR</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Vrinda</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Halami</surname>
							<given-names>PM</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sachindra</surname>
							<given-names>NM</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bhaskar</surname>
							<given-names>N</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2011</year>
					<article-title>Isolation and characterization of potential lactic acid bacteria (LAB) from freshwater fish processing wastes for application in fermentative utilization of fish processing waste</article-title>
					<source>Brazilian Journal of Microbiology</source>
					<volume>42</volume>
					<fpage>1516</fpage>
					<lpage>1525</lpage>
					<issn>1517-8382</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1590/S1517-83822011000400039</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B10">
				<mixed-citation>KETNAWA, S, Chaiwut, P, Rawdkuen, S. 2012. Pineapple wastes: A potential source for bromelain extraction. <italic>Food and Bioproducts Processing</italic>, 90:385.391. ISSN: 0960-3085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2011.12.006 </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>KETNAWA</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Chaiwut</surname>
							<given-names>P</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Rawdkuen</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2012</year>
					<article-title>Pineapple wastes: A potential source for bromelain extraction</article-title>
					<source>Food and Bioproducts Processing</source>
					<volume>90</volume>
					<fpage>385.391</fpage>
					<lpage>385.391</lpage>
					<issn>0960-3085</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.fbp.2011.12.006</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B11">
				<mixed-citation>LAND, M, Vanderperren, E, Raes, K. 2017. The effect of raw material combination on the nutritional composition and stability of four types of autolyzed fish silage. <italic>Animal Feed Science and Technology</italic>. 234:284-294. ISSN: 0377-8401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2017.10.009 </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>LAND</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Vanderperren</surname>
							<given-names>E</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Raes</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2017</year>
					<article-title>The effect of raw material combination on the nutritional composition and stability of four types of autolyzed fish silage</article-title>
					<source>Animal Feed Science and Technology</source>
					<volume>234</volume>
					<fpage>284</fpage>
					<lpage>294</lpage>
					<issn>0377-8401</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2017.10.009</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B12">
				<mixed-citation>OLSEN, RL, Toppe, J. 2017. Fish silage hydrolysates: No only a feed nutrient, but also a useful feed additive. <italic>Trends in Food Science &amp; Technology</italic>. 66:93-97. ISSN: 0924 2244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2017.06.003 </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>OLSEN</surname>
							<given-names>RL</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Toppe</surname>
							<given-names>J</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2017</year>
					<article-title>Fish silage hydrolysates: No only a feed nutrient, but also a useful feed additive</article-title>
					<source>Trends in Food Science &amp; Technology</source>
					<volume>66</volume>
					<fpage>93</fpage>
					<lpage>97</lpage>
					<issn>0924 2244</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tifs.2017.06.003</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B13">
				<mixed-citation>OZYURT, G, Boga, M, UÇar, Y, Boga, EK, Polat, A. 2017. Chemical, bioactive properties and in vitro digestibility of spray-dried fish silages: Comparison of two discard fish (<italic>Equulites klunzingeri</italic> and <italic>Carassius gibelio</italic>) silages. <italic>Aquaculture nutrition</italic>. 1-8. ISSN: 1365-2095. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/anu.12636">https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/anu.12636</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>OZYURT</surname>
							<given-names>G</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Boga</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>UÇar</surname>
							<given-names>Y</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Boga</surname>
							<given-names>EK</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Polat</surname>
							<given-names>A</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2017</year>
					<article-title>Chemical, bioactive properties and in vitro digestibility of spray-dried fish silages: Comparison of two discard fish (Equulites klunzingeri and Carassius gibelio) silages</article-title>
					<source>Aquaculture nutrition</source>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>8</lpage>
					<issn>1365-2095</issn>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/anu.12636">https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/anu.12636</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B14">
				<mixed-citation>RAMÍREZ-RAMÍREZ, JC, Huerta, S, Arias, L, Prado, A, Shirai, K. 2008. Utilization of shrimp by-catch and fish wastes by lactic acid fermentation and evaluation of degree of protein hydrolysis and <italic>in vitro</italic> digestibility. <italic>Revista Mexicana de Ingeniería Química</italic>. 7(3):195-204. ISSN 1665-2738. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/rmiq/v7n3/v7n3a3.pdf">http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/rmiq/v7n3/v7n3a3.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>RAMÍREZ-RAMÍREZ</surname>
							<given-names>JC</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Huerta</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Arias</surname>
							<given-names>L</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Prado</surname>
							<given-names>A</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Shirai</surname>
							<given-names>K</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2008</year>
					<article-title>Utilization of shrimp by-catch and fish wastes by lactic acid fermentation and evaluation of degree of protein hydrolysis and in vitro digestibility</article-title>
					<source>Revista Mexicana de Ingeniería Química</source>
					<volume>7</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>195</fpage>
					<lpage>204</lpage>
					<issn>1665-2738</issn>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/rmiq/v7n3/v7n3a3.pdf">http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/rmiq/v7n3/v7n3a3.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B15">
				<mixed-citation>RAMÍREZ-RAMÍREZ, JC, Ibarra, JI, Gutiérrez, R, Ulloa, JA, Rosas, P. 2016. Use of biological fish silage in broilers feed: Effect on growth performance and meat quality. <italic>Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences</italic>. 27(3):4293-4304. ISSN: 2071-7024. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://m.elewa.org/Journals/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/4.Ramirez.pdf">https://m.elewa.org/Journals/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/4.Ramirez.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>RAMÍREZ-RAMÍREZ</surname>
							<given-names>JC</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ibarra</surname>
							<given-names>JI</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Gutiérrez</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ulloa</surname>
							<given-names>JA</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Rosas</surname>
							<given-names>P</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>Use of biological fish silage in broilers feed: Effect on growth performance and meat quality</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences</source>
					<volume>27</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>4293</fpage>
					<lpage>4304</lpage>
					<issn>2071-7024</issn>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://m.elewa.org/Journals/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/4.Ramirez.pdf">https://m.elewa.org/Journals/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/4.Ramirez.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B16">
				<mixed-citation>RAMÍREZ-RAMÍREZ, JC, Gutiérrez, R, Ulloa, JA, Rosas, P, Torres, G, Bautista, PU. 2018. Utilization of fish and mango wastes on biological silage production. <italic>Current Research in Agricultural Sciences</italic>. 5(1):6-14. ISSN: 2312-6418. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.conscientiabeam.com/pdf-files/agr/68/CRAS-2018-5(1)-6-14.pdf">http://www.conscientiabeam.com/pdf-files/agr/68/CRAS-2018-5(1)-6-14.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>RAMÍREZ-RAMÍREZ</surname>
							<given-names>JC</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Gutiérrez</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ulloa</surname>
							<given-names>JA</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Rosas</surname>
							<given-names>P</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Torres</surname>
							<given-names>G</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bautista</surname>
							<given-names>PU</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2018</year>
					<article-title>Utilization of fish and mango wastes on biological silage production</article-title>
					<source>Current Research in Agricultural Sciences</source>
					<volume>5</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>6</fpage>
					<lpage>14</lpage>
					<issn>2312-6418</issn>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.conscientiabeam.com/pdf-files/agr/68/CRAS-2018-5(1)-6-14.pdf">http://www.conscientiabeam.com/pdf-files/agr/68/CRAS-2018-5(1)-6-14.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B17">
				<mixed-citation>RENUKA, V. Zynudheen, AA, Panda, SK, Ravishankar, CNR. 2016. Nutritional evaluation of processing discard from tiger tooth croaker, <italic>Otholites ruber</italic>. <italic>Food Science and Biotechnology</italic>. 25(5):1251-1257. ISSN: 2092-6456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068 016-0198-0 </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>RENUKA</surname>
							<given-names>V</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Zynudheen</surname>
							<given-names>AA</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Panda</surname>
							<given-names>SK</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ravishankar</surname>
							<given-names>CNR</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>Nutritional evaluation of processing discard from tiger tooth croaker</article-title>
					<source>Otholites ruber. Food Science and Biotechnology</source>
					<volume>25</volume>
					<issue>5</issue>
					<fpage>1251</fpage>
					<lpage>1257</lpage>
					<issn>2092-6456</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="art-access-id">10.1007/s10068 016-0198-0</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B18">
				<mixed-citation>SMICHI, N, Kharrat, N, Achouri, N, Gargouri, Y, Miled, N, Fendri, A. 2016. Physicochemical characterization and nutritional quality of fish by-products: <italic>in vitro</italic> oils digestibility and synthesis of flavour esters. <italic>Journal of Food Processing &amp; Technology</italic>. 7(7)602. ISSN: 2157-7110. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.longdom.org/archive/jfpt-volume-7-issue-7-year-2016.html">https://www.longdom.org/archive/jfpt-volume-7-issue-7-year-2016.html</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>SMICHI</surname>
							<given-names>N</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Kharrat</surname>
							<given-names>N</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Achouri</surname>
							<given-names>N</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Gargouri</surname>
							<given-names>Y</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Miled</surname>
							<given-names>N</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Fendri</surname>
							<given-names>A</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2016</year>
					<article-title>Physicochemical characterization and nutritional quality of fish by-products: in vitro oils digestibility and synthesis of flavour esters</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Food Processing &amp; Technology</source>
					<volume>7</volume>
					<issue>7</issue>
					<fpage>602</fpage>
					<lpage>602</lpage>
					<issn>2157-7110</issn>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.longdom.org/archive/jfpt-volume-7-issue-7-year-2016.html">https://www.longdom.org/archive/jfpt-volume-7-issue-7-year-2016.html</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B19">
				<mixed-citation>STATISTICA software, version 7.1. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://softadvice.informer.com/Statistica_7.1_Free_Download.html">https://softadvice.informer.com/Statistica_7.1_Free_Download.html</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="software">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<collab>STATISTICA</collab>
					</person-group>
					<version>7.1</version>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://softadvice.informer.com/Statistica_7.1_Free_Download.html">https://softadvice.informer.com/Statistica_7.1_Free_Download.html</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B20">
				<mixed-citation>TILLEY, MA, Terry, RA. 1963. A two-stage technique for the <italic>in vitro</italic> digestion of forage crops. <italic>Grass and Forage Science</italic>. 18(2):104-111. ISSN: 1365-2494. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>TILLEY</surname>
							<given-names>MA</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Terry</surname>
							<given-names>RA</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1963</year>
					<article-title>A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops</article-title>
					<source>Grass and Forage Science</source>
					<volume>18</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>104</fpage>
					<lpage>111</lpage>
					<issn>1365-2494</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B21">
				<mixed-citation>VAN SOEST, PJ, Robertson, JB, Lewis, BA. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. <italic>Journal of Dairy Science</italic>. 74(10):3583-3597. ISSN: 0022-0302. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(91)78551-2/pdf">https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(91)78551-2/pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>VAN SOEST</surname>
							<given-names>PJ</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Robertson</surname>
							<given-names>JB</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Lewis</surname>
							<given-names>BA</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1991</year>
					<article-title>Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Dairy Science</source>
					<volume>74</volume>
					<issue>10</issue>
					<fpage>3583</fpage>
					<lpage>3597</lpage>
					<issn>0022-0302</issn>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(91)78551-2/pdf">https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(91)78551-2/pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B22">
				<mixed-citation>VIDOTTI, RM, Bertoldo, MT, GonÇalves, GS. 2011. Characterization of the oils present in acid and fermented silage produced from Tilapia filleting residue. <italic>Revista Brazileira de Zootecnia</italic>. 40(2):240-244. ISSN: 1806-9290. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982011000200002 </mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>VIDOTTI</surname>
							<given-names>RM</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bertoldo</surname>
							<given-names>MT</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>GonÇalves</surname>
							<given-names>GS</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2011</year>
					<article-title>Characterization of the oils present in acid and fermented silage produced from Tilapia filleting residue</article-title>
					<source>Revista Brazileira de Zootecnia</source>
					<volume>40</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>240</fpage>
					<lpage>244</lpage>
					<issn>1806-9290</issn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1590/S1516-35982011000200002</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
		</ref-list>
		<fn-group>
			<fn fn-type="other" id="fn1">				
				<p>Clave:2020-62.</p>
			</fn>
		</fn-group>
	</back>
	<sub-article article-type="translation" id="s1" xml:lang="en">
		<front-stub>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>Original Article</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>Use of fish waste and pineapple peel to produce biological silage</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<abstract>
				<title>ABSTRACT</title>
				<p>Six treatments were formulated to make silages with fish wastes, corn stubble, molasses, pineapple peel (PP) [15, 30 and 45%] and inoculum <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp. or <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2. The silages of each treatment were made in triplicate and incubated at 30 °C for 0, 2, 4, 7 and 14 days in order to evaluate the acidification under a 3 x 2 x 5 factorial design. The chemical composition and <italic>in vitro</italic> dry matter digestibility (IVDMD) were determined to the silages at end of fermentation. The highest acidification (p&lt;0.05) was presented in the treatments with PP 15 and 30% and <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 for 7 days. The highest dry matter content (39.3%) (p&lt;0.05) was obtained with 15% of PP and the crude protein was from 26.5 to 31% without significant difference. The highest concentration of lipids (9.85%) was present in the treatments with PP 30 and 45% and <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2. Detergent fiber fractions decreased with increasing PP level and the highest IVDMD (82.9%) occurred in silages when using <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2, regardless of PP level. The silages obtained are an alternative in ruminant feeding.</p>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="en">
				<title>Keywords:</title>
				<kwd>Fish waste</kwd>
				<kwd>pineapple peel</kwd>
				<kwd>biological silage</kwd>
				<kwd>ruminant feeding</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
		</front-stub>
		<body>
			<sec sec-type="intro">
				<title>INTRODUCTION</title>
				<p>World fisheries production in 2016 reached approximately 171 million tons, of which aquaculture accounted for 47% of the total and fishing for 53%, not including what was destined for the production of fishmeal and fish oil (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">FAO, 2018</xref>). More than 60% of residues made up of fins, scales, heads, viscera, skeleton, skin, roe and remains of meat derive from the industrial processing of fish (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Ghosh <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Renuka <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>). These wastes in many parts of the world are discarded, which causes a great loss of nutrients such as proteins, lipids and minerals, in addition to polluting the environment (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Olsen and Toppe, 2017</xref>). With fish waste, fertilizers, concentrates and protein hydrolysates, as well as fish meal and oil can be produced (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Renuka <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Ozyurt <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>). Biotechnologies have also been developed for the fish waste conversion into high-value products such as polyunsaturated fatty acids, physiologically important peptides, carbohydrates and other bioactive compounds (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Smichi <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>). However, most of these technologies are not economically attractive because they require high investment (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Ozyurt <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>). The most important input in animal production is fishmeal due to its high protein content, but due to its high cost, alternative sources of protein are demanded in the market (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>). Fish silage is a product resulting from the preservation of whole fish or parts by the addition of organic or inorganic acids (chemical silage) or by bacterial fermentation (biological silage) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Olsen and Toppe, 2017</xref>). The fish silage produced by the biological method is a viable technological alternative from the economic and environmental point of view, which consists of mixing the ground fish waste with molasses or another carbohydrate source and a starter culture of lactic acid bacteria (LAB ) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>). During fermentation, LABs increase the production of acids, mainly lactic, so the pH decreases and microbial deterioration slows down. Furthermore, fish proteases are activated, accelerating proteolysis and consequently the digestibility of the product increases (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>). Likewise, LABs generate compounds such as bacteriocins and hydrogen peroxide that help preservation and diacetyl, an aroma and flavor enhancing substance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Jini <italic>et al</italic>., 2011</xref>). In this sense, to achieve control of fermentation, the selection of LAB strains is important. According to various studies, fish silage is an excellent source of proteins, lipids and minerals with great biological properties for animal feed (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Land <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>), in addition, biological fish silage has antibacterial and antioxidant benefits and it is a possible source of probiotics (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Jini <italic>et al</italic>., 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Ozyurt <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>). On the other hand, pineapple (<italic>Annanas comosus</italic> Merr.) Ranks third as the most popular and most economically important fruit in the world, with a production of 24'785,762 tons (FAOSTAT, 2018). From pineapple industrialization, approximately 75% of the weight of the fruit is obtained as waste, which is a valuable fiber source, soluble sugars, protein, ascorbic acid, vitamins, minerals, water and bioactive compounds such as bromelain from multiple applications (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Damasceno <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Ketnawa <italic>et al</italic>., 2012</xref>). Pineapple waste can be used as a good quality substrate for microorganisms in fermentation processes; however, they are often thrown away causing serious contamination problems (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Ketnawa <italic>et al</italic>., 2012</xref>). For all the above, the use of fish and pineapple waste could be a viable and relevant alternative from an economic and environmental point of view. To our knowledge there are no reports on the use of fish waste and pineapple peel together. Therefore, the objective of this research was to evaluate the use of these industrial wastes in the silage production by lactic fermentation. </p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="materials|methods">
				<title>MATERIAL AND METHODS</title>
				<p>Raw material preparation </p>
				<p><italic>Fish waste and pineapple peel</italic></p>
				<p>Fish waste was obtained from commercial marine species such as <italic>Bagre panamensis</italic>, <italic>Peprilus snyderi</italic>, <italic>Sphyraena ensis</italic>, <italic>Trachynotus ovatus</italic>, <italic>Argyrosomus regius</italic>, <italic>Diplodus vulgaris</italic> and <italic>Bagre panamensis</italic> (estuarine fish) from San Blas port, Nayarit, Mexico. The waste was processed in a meat mill (Torrey Brand, model 32-3, Mexico) using the 0.5 cm diameter sieve and stored at -20 °C until use. The peel of pineapple (<italic>Annanas comosus</italic> Merr.), Cayenne smooth variety, was obtained manually with a knife and homogeneously ground in a food processor. The following <xref ref-type="table" rid="t5">table</xref> shows the chemical composition of these ingredients. </p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t5">
						<label>Table 1</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Chemical composition (% DM) of fish waste and pineapple peel.</title>
						</caption>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="center">Component </th>
									<th align="center">Fish waste </th>
									<th align="center">Pineapple peel </th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Dry matter </td>
									<td align="center">29.72 ± 0.4</td>
									<td align="center">23.22 ± 0.37</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Ash </td>
									<td align="center">18.94 ± 0.52</td>
									<td align="center">4.11 ± 0.12</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Crude protein (Nt x 6.25) </td>
									<td align="center">52.43 ± 0.92</td>
									<td align="center">4.31 ± 0.13</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Ethereal extract </td>
									<td align="center">24.50 ± 0.67</td>
									<td align="center">3.38 ± 0.46</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Crude fiber </td>
									<td align="center">---</td>
									<td align="center">13.95 ± 0.55</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Neutral detergent fiber </td>
									<td align="center">---</td>
									<td align="center">41.60 ± 1.10</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Detergent acid fiber </td>
									<td align="center">---</td>
									<td align="center">22.71 ± 0.73</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">ELN</td>
									<td align="center">4.13</td>
									<td align="center">74.25</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN9">
								<p>Mean ± standard deviation, n = 3.</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN10">
								<p>ELN = 100 -% ash -% crude protein -% lipids -% crude fiber.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>Cane molasses and corn stubble </p>
				<p>Cane molasses with a moisture content of 25.15%, 10.37% ash and 55.73% total soluble carbohydrates was used. To improve the consistency of the silages, corn stubble processed in a knife mill was added using the 2 mm sieve (Willey, model 4, Philadelphia, USA). </p>
				<p>Inoculums </p>
				<p><italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 and <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp. strains were evaluated, the latter being isolated from mango waste in our laboratory. The initiators were cultured in MRS broth (from Man Rogosa and Sharpe, MRS, Merck Darmstadt) at 30 °C for 24 h until a final concentration of 1 X 109 cfu/mL was recorded. </p>
				<p>Silage production </p>
				<p>Six treatments were prepared with different amounts in percentage proportion of fish waste, PP (15, 30 and 45%, w/w), corn stubble, and sugar cane molasses (9%, w/w). As inoculum (I) <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp. or <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 at 4% (v/p) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t6">Table 2</xref>). The mixtures obtained were used to make 100 g mini silos in black plastic bags. Each treatment was prepared in triplicate and the silos were vacuum sealed and incubated at 30 ° C for 14 days. </p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t6">
						<label>Table 2</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Percentage composition of ingredients used in the production of silage by lactic acid fermentation.</title>
						</caption>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col span="6"/>
							</colgroup>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Ingredient </td>
									<td align="center" colspan="6">Porcentage </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Fish waste </td>
									<td align="center">57</td>
									<td align="center">47</td>
									<td align="center">37</td>
									<td align="center">57</td>
									<td align="center">47</td>
									<td align="center">37</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Pineapple peel </td>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">45</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Molasses </td>
									<td align="center">9</td>
									<td align="center">9</td>
									<td align="center">9</td>
									<td align="center">9</td>
									<td align="center">9</td>
									<td align="center">9</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Corn stubble </td>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">10</td>
									<td align="center">5</td>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">10</td>
									<td align="center">5</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="justify">Inoculum </td>
									<td align="center">4A</td>
									<td align="center">4A</td>
									<td align="center">4A</td>
									<td align="center">4B</td>
									<td align="center">4B</td>
									<td align="center">4B</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN11">
								<p>A = <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp isolated from mango waste.</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN12">
								<p>B = <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>Chemical analysis </p>
				<p>The silages were analyzed every 0, 2, 4, 7 and 14 days (T) to determine the pH with a potentiometer model UB10 Ultra Basic (Denver Instrument, USA) and the content of lactic acid by titration. The silages obtained at the end of fermentation were analyzed to determine their proximal chemical composition (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">AOAC, 2005</xref>) and the contents of neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) by the method of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Van Soest <italic>et al</italic>. (1991)</xref>. </p>
				<p><italic>In Vitro</italic> Digestibility of Dry Matter (IVDMD) </p>
				<p>IVDMD was determined following the two-step technique of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Tilley and Terry (1963)</xref>. The silage samples were dried at 70 °C for 24 h in a forced air oven and processed in a Wiley mill to a particle size of 1 mm. Two uncastrated Blackbelly sheep weighing 35 kg of body weight and equipped with a cannula in the rumen were used to collect the ruminal fluid. The sheep were fed a diet based on 25% corn silage, 25% alfalfa and 50% concentrate. In the second step of the IVDMD technique, pepsin (Sigma P-7012, Sigma) was used. </p>
				<p>Statistical analysis </p>
				<p>The data of the fermentation parameters were treated by analysis of variance (ANDEVA) for a factorial design 3 x 2 x 5 (level of pineapple peel x inoculum x fermentation time). The data obtained from the chemical composition and IVDMD were analyzed by ANDEVA for a 3 x 2 factorial design (level of pineapple peel x inoculum). </p>
				<p>When a significant difference was found, the means of the treatments were compared with the Tukey test (p &lt;0.05). The analysis was done with the Statistica 7 program (Statistica, versión 7.1). </p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="results|discussion">
				<title>RESULTS AND DISCUSSION</title>
				<p>Fermentative parameters </p>
				<p>The silage lactic acid content showed significant differences between treatments due to the inoculum factors (I) and fermentation time (T) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Table 3</xref>). The unfermented mixtures presented the lowest lactic acid content (average 0.55 ± 0.15%) with no difference between these treatments (p&gt; 0.05). However, between days 2 and 7 of the process, most of the treatments with <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 presented the maximum concentration of lactic acid (average 3.42 ± 0.17%). The high acidifying power of <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 has been previously reported (Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2008; 2018) and in this work it is reaffirmed. The results obtained agree with values of 2.96 to 4.42% of lactic acid recently reported for biological silage added with mixtures of fish and mango waste (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>), as well as with the values of 2.96 and 3.08% of lactic acid for fermented shrimp head silage and fish waste; respectively (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>). </p>
				<p>The pH was significantly affected by the main factors, pineapple peel level (PP), inoculum (I) and fermentation time (T); confirming the PP x I and PP x T interactions (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Table 3</xref>). The unfermented mixtures presented the highest pH values and when the PP level increased there was a decrease in this parameter (p &lt;0.05). In silages, it was observed that when the lactic acid production increased, the pH decreased significantly, obtaining the best pH values between days 2 and 7 of fermentation (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Table 3</xref>), which is due to the fact that LAB reaches the growth curve top. However, the PP x I interaction showed that at 7 days of the process the pH of the treatments with 15 and 30% of PP and inoculated with <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 was better than with <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp, which was also observed in a similar way to the 14 days in silage with 15% PP. The silage pH was affected by the PP x T interaction during the 0, 7 and 15 days of the process (p &lt;0.05). However, between 2 and 4 days of fermentation, the pH values of the silages did not show significant differences, regardless of PP level and inoculum type (p &lt;0.05). The treatments with 30 and 45% PP at 14 days of fermentation showed a small increase in pH, which was related to a decrease of 0.72 percentage units in the lactic acid production. The increase in pH was due to the buffering effect of fish proteins and peptides derived from their hydrolysis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>), as well as the high amount of ashes provided by the bones from fish waste (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t6">Tables 2</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">4</xref>), since calcium salts act as neutralizers of lactic acid in silage during storage (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Land <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>). </p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t7">
						<label>Table 3</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Effect of pineapple peel level, inoculum and fermentation time on the lactic acid content and pH of the silage.</title>
						</caption>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Pineapple peel level (PP) (%) </td>
									<td align="center">Inoculum (I) </td>
									<td align="left">Fermentation time (T) (days) </td>
									<td align="center">Lactic acid (%) </td>
									<td align="center">pH</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">0</td>
									<td align="center">0.49 ± 0.08c</td>
									<td align="center">6.09 ± 0.05a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">0</td>
									<td align="center">0.43 ± 0.01c</td>
									<td align="center">6.05 ± 0.14a</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">0</td>
									<td align="center">0.55 ± 0.02c</td>
									<td align="center">5.83 ± 0.01b</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">0</td>
									<td align="center">0.73 ± 0.03c</td>
									<td align="center">5.60 ± 0.10c</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">0</td>
									<td align="center">0.37 ± 0.14c</td>
									<td align="center">5.44 ± 0.25c</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">0</td>
									<td align="center">0.72 ± 0.07c</td>
									<td align="center">5.32 ± 0.28c</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">2</td>
									<td align="center">2.97 ± 0.45b</td>
									<td align="center">4.62 ± 0.03e</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">2</td>
									<td align="center">3.37 ± 0.05<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.65 ± 0.07<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">2</td>
									<td align="center">2.71 ± 0.25<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.64 ± 0.05<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">2</td>
									<td align="center">3.32 ± 0.21<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.52 ± 0.05<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">2</td>
									<td align="center">2.98 ± 0.41<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.36 ± 0.09<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">2</td>
									<td align="center">3.14 ± 0.15<sup>ab</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.51 ± 0.05<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">4</td>
									<td align="center">3.09 ± 0.61<sup>ab</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.69 ± 0.15<sup>de</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">4</td>
									<td align="center">3.57 ± 0.06<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.63 ± 0.04<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">4</td>
									<td align="center">2.78 ± 0.14<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.65 ± 0.03<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">4</td>
									<td align="center">3.79 ± 0.34<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.49 ± 0.01<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">4</td>
									<td align="center">2.98 ± 0.41<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.44 ± 0.05<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">4</td>
									<td align="center">3.49 ± 0.25<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.56 ± 0.04<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">7</td>
									<td align="center">2.77 ± 0.28<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.77 ± 0.04<sup>d</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">7</td>
									<td align="center">3.32 ± 0.47<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.68 ± 0.16<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">7</td>
									<td align="center">2.49 ± 0.14<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.82 ± 0.03<sup>d</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">7</td>
									<td align="center">3.31 ± 0.33<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.50 ± 0.11<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">7</td>
									<td align="center">3.44 ± 0.12<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.43 ± 0.01<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">7</td>
									<td align="center">3.47 ± 0.13<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.50 ± 0.15<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">14</td>
									<td align="center">2.34 ± 0.74<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.89 ± 0.06<sup>d</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">14</td>
									<td align="center">2.76 ± 0.04<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.68 ± 0.21<sup>e</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">14</td>
									<td align="center">2.61 ± 0.26<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.77 ± 0.06<sup>d</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">14</td>
									<td align="center">2.83 ± 0.55<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.83 ± 0.03<sup>d</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">1</td>
									<td align="center">2.82 ± 0.31<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.82 ± 0.06<sup>d</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">14</td>
									<td align="center">2.93 ± 0.44<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">4.77 ± 0.05<sup>d</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Effect</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center" colspan="2">P Value</td>
									
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">CP</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">0.24</td>
									<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">I</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
									<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">T</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
									<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">CP x I</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">0.12</td>
									<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">CP x T</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">0.17</td>
									<td align="center">&lt; 0.01</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">I x T</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">0.15</td>
									<td align="center">0.24</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">CP x I x T</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">0.57</td>
									<td align="center">0.09</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN13">
								<p>A = <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp, isolated from mango waste.</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN14">
								<p>B = <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2.</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN15">
								<p>a, b, c, d, e: Means in the same column with a different superscript show a significant difference (p &lt;0.05).</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>However, the silage obtained in this study presented acceptable sensory characteristics and did not show signs of decomposition. The pH values of this study silages agree with those of other reports (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>), although they were higher than the 4.2 obtained for biological silage from residues of tilapia filleting (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Gerón <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>). </p>
				<p>Chemical composition </p>
				<p>
					<xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">Table 4</xref> shows the results of the chemical composition and IVDMD of the silages obtained after 14 days of fermentation. The dry matter content (DM) decreased significantly when the PP level increased, therefore the silages with 45% PP presented the lowest DM content, regardless of the inoculating strain (p &lt;0.05). The silages with 15% PP presented the highest DM values (39.3%), despite having a high content of fish waste (57%) in their formulation, whose moisture percentage is high (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t5">Tables 1</xref>, <xref ref-type="table" rid="t6">2</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">4</xref>). This was probably due to the addition of 15% corn stubble, which also improved the silage consistency. The DM results obtained agree with those of other reports (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>). The PP level and the PP x I interaction were significant in the ash content. The silages with 15% PP and inoculated with Lactobacillus sp. presented the highest ash content (14.5%) (p &lt;0.05), however, the other treatments presented a good concentration of minerals, because fish waste is an important source of these nutrients <xref ref-type="table" rid="t5">Tables (1</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">4)</xref>. The ash content obtained is similar to other investigation results (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>), although they were lower than 18.7% reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>. (2007)</xref>. </p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t8">
						<label>Table 4</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Effect of pineapple peel level and inoculum on the proximal chemical composition, neutral detergent fiber (NDF), acid detergent fiber (ADF) and <italic>in vitro</italic> dry matter digestibility (IVDMD) of the silage</title>
						</caption>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Pineapple peel (PP) </td>
									<td align="center">Inoculum (I) </td>
									<td align="center">Dry matter (%) </td>
									<td align="center">Ashes (%) </td>
									<td align="center">Crude protein (%) </td>
									<td align="center">Ethereal extract (%)</td>
									<td align="center">NDF (%) </td>
									<td align="center">ADF (%) </td>
									<td align="center">IVDMD (%) </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">39.6±0.7<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">14.5±0.6<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">27.5±1.5<sup>ab</sup></td>
									<td align="center">6.0±0.7<sup>c</sup></td>
									<td align="center">39.7±3.3<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">22.1±0.9<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">76.8±1.7<sup>b</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">35.1±0.5<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">11.7± 0.3<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">26.5±1.9<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">5.2±0.6<sup>c</sup></td>
									<td align="center">41.9±2.4<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">22.7±1.7<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">76.2 ±1.1<sup>b</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">A</td>
									<td align="center">28.5±1.3<sup>c</sup></td>
									<td align="center">12.5± 0.5<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">26.7±0.9<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">5.7±0.5<sup>c</sup></td>
									<td align="center">32.1±0.7<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">17.9±1.6<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">82.6±0.5<sup>a</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">15</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">39.0±1.4<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">12.8±0.2<sup></sup>b</td>
									<td align="center">29.7±0.8<sup>ab</sup></td>
									<td align="center">8.0±1.0<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">37.5±2.4<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">21.6±2.0<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">80.6±0.3<sup>a</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">30</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">33.5±0.5<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">12.3± 1.4<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">27.8±3.0<sup>ab</sup></td>
									<td align="center">9.7±0.8<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">35.7±1.6<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">24.6±1.5<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">84.4±3<sup>a</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">45</td>
									<td align="center">B</td>
									<td align="center">28.9±1.5<sup>c</sup></td>
									<td align="center">12.9±0.7<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">31.0±3.6<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">10.0±0.8<sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">28.0±0.9<sup>c</sup></td>
									<td align="center">18.4±0.8<sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">83.8±2.1<sup>a</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Effect p value</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">PP</td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
									<td align="center">0.01</td>
									<td align="center">0.369</td>
									<td align="center">0.021</td>
									<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
									<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
									<td align="center">0.03</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Inoculum </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">0.26</td>
									<td align="center">0.51</td>
									<td align="center">.028</td>
									<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
									<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
									<td align="center">0.39</td>
									<td align="center">&lt;0.01</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">PP x Inoculum </td>
									<td align="center"> </td>
									<td align="center">0.33</td>
									<td align="center">0.04</td>
									<td align="center">0.52</td>
									<td align="center">0.30</td>
									<td align="center">0.97</td>
									<td align="center">0.42</td>
									<td align="center">0.08</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN16">
								<p>A = <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp., Isolated from mango waste.</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN17">
								<p>B = <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2.</p>
							</fn>
							<fn id="TFN18">
								<p>a, b, c: Values with different letters in each column differ statistically (p &lt;0.05).</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>The silages showed a significant difference in the crude protein content due to the type of inoculum used. The silages with 45% PP and inoculated with <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 presented numerically the highest crude protein content (31%), but statistically the PP level and the inoculum did not produce relevant changes in silage crude protein (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">Table 4</xref>). The crude protein content of silages obtained with 45% PP and <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 coincides with 31.6% of biological silage from tilapia waste (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>), although it was higher than 28.08% of crude protein from biological silage of fish and mango waste (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>); however, it was lower than the 35.42% reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>. (2019)</xref> for biological silage of fish waste, molasses and yogurt. </p>
				<p>Silage ethereal extract showed a significant difference due to the main effects. In this regard, treatments with 30 and 45% PP and inoculated with <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 showed the highest lipid content (9.85%), which is very important from a nutritional point of view, since essential fatty acids are found in them for animal feed (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Vidotti <italic>et al</italic>., 2011</xref>). The ethereal extract results of this study are lower than those reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>. (2007</xref>) y <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Castillo <italic>et al</italic>. (2019)</xref>; however, they coincide with the findings of another study (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>). The NDF and ADF contents decreased with increasing PP level. Although PP is a good source of fiber (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t5">Table 1</xref>), the trend in the results was due to the addition of corn stubble in the formula, since the silages with a higher PP content at the same time contained a lower amount of corn stubble and therefore less NDF and ADF content (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t6">Tables 2</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">4</xref>). In this sense, the results are very important, since the contents of NDF and ADF in forages are negatively correlated with consumption and digestibility. The percentages of NDF and ADF obtained in the silages of the present study were higher than those reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>. (2018)</xref>. </p>
				<p><italic>In Vitro</italic> Digestibility of Dry Matter (IVDMD) </p>
				<p>The digestibility values of food components are important parameters to evaluate the formulation of diets and to determine the use of a food component (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Ozyurt <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>). The IVDMD values of the silages presented a range of 76.2 to 84.4% with significant differences between treatments due to the main effects (p &lt;0.05). By increasing the PP level to 45% and with the addition of <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp., the silages presented an increase of 6.1 percentage units in the IVDMD to reach 82.6% (p &lt;0.05). However, this result was statistically the same when using <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2, regardless of PP level (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">Table 4</xref>). In fish silage production, the proteases present in the acidic medium hydrolyze the proteins into smaller fragments, peptides and amino acids, which affects the total digestibility (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Ghaly <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Geron <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Olsen and Toppe, 2017</xref>). The PP effect on the increase in IVDMD was probably due to an increase in nutrient availability, which was related to the decrease in fiber fractions and consequently increased ruminal microbial activity. Likewise, the addition of PP probably increased the activity of the pepsin used in the second step of the digestibility test, which simulates stomach digestion and therefore the IVDMD of the silages increased. LABs are better known as starter cultures due to their versatile metabolic characteristics such as acidifying activity, proteolytic activity, and bacteriocin synthesis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Jini <italic>et al</italic>., 2011</xref>). In general, IVDMD of the silages was higher with <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 than with <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp., due to the better acidifying power of <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 and probably to a high production capacity of digestive enzymes. The IVDMD results obtained in this work agree with those of other reports (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Ozyurt <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Ramírez-Ramírez <italic>et al</italic>., 2018</xref>). </p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="conclusions">
				<title>CONCLUSIONS</title>
				<p>The inclusion of pineapple peel in 15 and 30% and <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2 caused the best acidification of silages at 7 days of fermentation. However, at 14 days all silages were stable and presented high nutrient content. Furthermore, the use of <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> B2, regardless of pineapple peel level produced the highest IVDMD of the silages. Silage production with fish waste and pineapple peel in combination with molasses and corn stubble is a simple, economical and environmentally friendly technological alternative. It is recommended to scale up the production process and evaluate the silage in ruminant feeding.</p>
			</sec>
		</body>
	</sub-article>
</article>