Forage production in mixed grazing systems of elephant grass with arrowleaf clover or forage peanut

Seibt, Daiane Cristine; Olivo, Clair Jorge; Alessio, Vinicius; Silva, Aline Rodrigues; Quatrin, Maurício Pase; Anjos, Amanda Nunes Assis dos

doi:10.1590/0034-737X201865020009

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Animal Prodution and Reproduction • Rev. Ceres 65 (02) • Mar-Apr 2018 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-737X201865020009 copy

Forage production in mixed grazing systems of elephant grass with arrowleaf clover or forage peanut¹ This work is part of the first author’s Master Dissertation.

Produção de forragem em sistemas forrageiros de capim elefante consorciados com trevo vesiculoso ou amendoim forrageiro

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Most dairy production systems are pasture-based, usually consisting of sole grass species. This system facilitates pasture management, but results in high production costs, mainly because of nitrogen fertilizers. An alternative to making forage systems more sustainable is to introduce legumes into the pasture. Mixed pastures allow better forage distribution over time and reduce fertilization costs. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate, throughout the year, three forage systems (FS): FS1 (control) - elephant grass (EG), ryegrass (RG), and spontaneous species (SS); FS2 - EG + RG + SS + arrowleaf clover; and FS3 - EG + RG + SS + forage peanut. Elephant grass was planted in rows spaced 4 m apart. Ryegrass was sown between the EG lines, in the winter. Arrowleaf clover was sown according to the respective treatments and forage peanut was preserved. Evaluation was carried out using Holstein cows. The experiment was arranged in a completely randomized design, with three treatments (FS), and three repetitions (paddocks) with repeated measurements (grazing cycles). Forage mass achieved 3.46, 3.80, and 3.91 t ha^-1 for the treatments FS1, FS2 and FS3, respectively. The forage systems intercropped with legumes produced the best results.

Keywords:
Arachis pintoi; Pennisetum purpureum; Trifolium vesiculosum

Universidade Federal de Viçosa Av. Peter Henry Rolfs, s/n, 36570-000 Viçosa, Minas Gerais Brasil, Tel./Fax: (55 31) 3612-2078 - Viçosa - MG - Brazil
E-mail: ceres@ufv.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *Corresponding author: daianeseibt_np@yahoo.com.br

FS	Grazing cycles								Mean	CV (%)
	1º	2º	3º	4º	5º	6º	7º	8º
	Ago/13	Sep/13	Oct/13	Nov/13	Jan/14	Feb/14	Mar/14	Apr/14
	Pasture forage mass (t of DM ha^-1)
WL¹	2.1 ^H	1.8 ^H	5.1 ^BC	2.9 ^G	5.4 ^B	2.9 ^G	4.2 ^DE	3.4 ^EFG	3.5	4.9
AC²	2.0 ^H	1.9 ^H	5.8 ^AB	3.1 ^G	5.1 ^BC	3.6 ^EFG	5.0 ^BC	3.9 ^DEF	3.8	4.4
FP³	1.8 ^H	1.6 ^H	5.8 ^AB	3.7 ^DEFG	6.5 ^A	3.2 ^FG	4.4 ^CD	4.4 ^CD	3.9	4.3
CV (%)	14.1	15.7	5.0	8.6	4.9	8.6	6.1	7.0

	Elephant grass (%)
WL	-	-	12.0	15.8	23.2 ^b	44.3 ^b	44.9 ^b	32.9 ^b	28.9	16.6
AC	-	-	20.5	21.1	36.9 ^a	56.2 ^a	64.2 ^a	44.4 ^a	40.5	11.8
FP	-	-	20.4	18.3	24.3 ^b	42.8 ^b	46.2 ^b	37.8 ^ab	31.6	15.1
CV (%)			21.7	20.8	13.6	8.0	7.4	10.0

	Elephant grass senescent material (%)
WL	-	-	1.4	0.7	0.8	1.7	2.8	1.1	1.4	18.8
AC	-	-	2.9	3.8	0.9	1.9	3.3	1.9	2.4	11.6
FP	-	-	0.3	1.2	1.2	0.9	2.2	1.9	1.3	22.4
CV (%)			24.4	19.1	26.3	23.7	13.8	21.4

	Spontaneous species (%)
WL	17.6 ^EFG	29.5 ^DE	17.5 ^FG	43.8 ^B	59.5 ^A	41.5 ^BC	47.8 ^AB	60.0 ^A	39.6	3.0
AC	6.0 ^I	29.0 ^DE	8.1 ^I	25.7 ^DEF	43.1 ^BC	33.4 ^CD	30.2 ^CDE	46.7 ^AB	27.8	3.7
FP	22.7 ^EF	27.1 ^DE	11.7 ^H	16.5 ^G	34.1 ^BCD	22.6 ^EF	21.2 ^EFG	24.9 ^DEF	22.6	3.9
CV (%)	4.7	5.7	2.3	3.7	6.8	4.7	5.8	6.5

	Legumes (%)
AC	3.5 ^E	3.1 ^E	20.2 ^CD	21.8 ^BCD	12.4 ^DE	-	-	-	12.2	23.1
FP	18.8 ^CD	34.6 ^A	23.7 ^BC	33.5 ^A	31.1 ^AB	26.9 ^ABC	28.1 ^ABC	30.6 ^AB	28.4	7.1
CV (%)	29.0	21.2	18.2	14.5	18.4

	Ryegrass (%)
WL	29.8^BCDE	38.5 ^BC	60.1 ^A	7.0 ^F	-	-	-	-	33.8	13.8
AC	18.5^E	33.9 ^BCD	42.6 ^B	2.7 ^G	-	-	-	-	24.4	19.2
FP	26.3^CDE	21.7 ^DE	37.0 ^BC	2.5 ^G	-	-	-	-	21.9	21.5
CV (%)	18.3	13.4	9.2	10.0

	Dead material between rows (%)
WL	52.6 ^B	32.0 ^C	9.4 ^EFG	32.9 ^C	17.0 ^D	14.2 ^D	5.4 ^H	6.1 ^H	21.2	3.3
AC	72.0 ^A	34.0 ^C	7.7 ^EFGH	26.3 ^C	7.4 ^FGH	9.8 ^EF	2.4 ^J	6.9 ^GH	20.8	3.5
FP	32.2 ^C	16.6 ^D	7.0 ^GH	26.9 ^C	10.0 ^E	7.4 ^FGH	2.2 ^J	3.7 ^I	13.3	4.3
CV (%)	4.1	4.3	9.8	7.2	4.6	5.8	5.2	4.5

FS	Grazing cycles								Mean	CV (%)
	1º	2º	3º	4º	5º	6º	7º	8º
	Ago/13	Sep/13	Oct/13	Nov/13	Jan/14	Feb/14	Mar/14	Apr/14
	Pasture forage mass (t of DM ha^-1)
WL¹	1.4	1.4	3.9	2.0	2.9	1.9	2.5	2.4	2.3	6.4
AC²	1.3	1.3	3.9	1.8	3.0	1.7	2.4	2.6	2.2	6.5
FP³	1.1	1.2	3.9	2.2	3.8	2.0	2.2	2.6	2.4	6.1
CV (%)	15.1	14.3	4.9	9.4	5.9	10.3	8.0	7.5

	Elephant grass (%)
WL	-	-	0.7 ^G	1.8 ^F	7.4 ^C	22.6 ^AB	21.4 ^B	21.1 ^AB	12.5	12.5
AC	-	-	0.7 ^G	3.9 ^DE	19.7 ^B	34.5 ^A	37.4 ^A	29.3 ^AB	20.9	20.9
FP	-	-	3.5 ^E	4.8 ^CD	7.0 ^CD	27.8 ^AB	26.3 ^AB	24.8 ^AB	15.7	15.7
CV (%)			27.4	15.0	10.9	5.5	8.5	4.5

	Elephant grass senescent material (%)
WL	-	-	0.1 ^G	0.5 ^FG	0.7 ^F	2.0 ^CDEF	2.0 ^CDEF	1.1 ^DEF	1.1	15.5
AC	-	-	0.1 ^G	0.9 ^EF	1.6 ^DEF	2.3 ^BCDE	6.3 ^A	4.2 ^AB	2.6	9.4
FP	-	-	0.1 ^G	0.9 ^EF	0.6 ^F	1.6 ^DEF	2.4 ^BCD	2.9 ^BC	1.4	12.7
CV (%)			19.9	24.6	11.1	21.3	12.8	10.7

	Spontaneous species (%)
WL	25.2	34.1	32.3	41.4 ^a	72.1 ^a	62.8 ^a	65.6 ^a	69.3 ^a	50.4	6.7
AC	16.1	32.0	25.7	35.1 ^ab	53.3 ^b	49.7 ^a	45.0 ^b	51.9 ^b	38.6	8.7
FP	13.9	26.5	21.9	26.8 ^b	41.3 ^b	25.1 ^b	39.7 ^b	39.9 ^b	29.4	11.5
CV (%)	25.7	15.3	17.8	13.7	8.5	10.3	9.4	8.8

	Legumes (%)
AC	0.5 ^F	1.9 ^F	20.5 ^CD	12.7 ^DEF	8.8 ^EF	-	-	-	8.9	41.6
FP	36.6 ^A	37.2 ^A	25.4 ^BC	32.1 ^AB	31.9 ^AB	33.8 ^AB	18.4 ^CDE	22.8 ^BCD	29.8	7.7
CV (%)	28.4	23.4	19.9	20.4	22.4

	Ryegrass (%)
WL	19.8	19.1	52.5	-	-	-	-	-	30.5	11.7
AC	24.1	17.5	39.2	-	-	-	-	-	26.9	12.7
FP	19.5	11.1	39.9	-	-	-	-	-	23.5	14.6
CV (%)	17.2	21.6	7.8

	Dead material between rows (%)
WL	55.0	46.8	14.5	56.3	20.2	12.6	11.0	8.5	28.1	4.4
AC	59.6	48.5	13.9	47.4	16.7	13.4	11.4	14.7	28.2	4.4
FP	30.0	25.3	9.3	35.5	19.3	11.6	13.3	9.5	19.2	4.9
CV (%)	2.7	5.5	16.1	1.9	9.9	6.0	8.6	8.8

FS	Grazing cycles								Mean	CV (%)
	1º	2º	3º	4º	5º	6º	7º	8º
	ago/13	Sep/13	Oct/13	nov/13	jan/14	Feb/14	mar/14	Apr/14
	Accumulation rate (kg of DM ha^-1 day^-1)
WL¹	14.2 ^I	23.1 ^GHI	69.0 ^C	20.7 ^HI	66.0 ^CD	96.8 ^AB	75.7 ^C	53.7 ^D	52.4	6.9
AC²	8.3 ^J	38.5 ^EF	84.8 ^BC	24.9 ^GH	85.0 ^BC	110.2 ^A	113.4^A	51.0 ^DE	64.5	5.6
FP³	17.0 ^I	21.1 ^HI	79.2 ^C	32.0 ^FG	83.7 ^BC	111.0 ^A	84.3 ^BC	80.3 ^C	63.6	5.6
CV (%)	12.4	17.0	7.6	11.0	11.4	6.0	9.5	5.8

	Forage production (kg of DM ha^-1) *
WL	1.0 ^EF	0.6 ^FGH	3.9 ^B	0.5 ^H	3.6 ^B	2.3 ^C	2.3 ^C	1.6 ^D	2.0	1.1
AC	0.6 ^GH	1.1 ^DEF	4.8 ^A	0.8 ^EF	3.8 ^B	2.6 ^C	3.5 ^B	1.6 ^D	2.3	1.1
FP	1.2 ^DE	0.6 ^GH	4.5 ^AB	0.8 ^EFG	4.5 ^AB	2.6 ^C	2.5 ^C	2.4 ^C	2.4	1.0
CV (%)	2.9	3.7	0.8	1.0	1.4	1.0	1.3	0.8

	Grazing efficiency (%)
WL	34.8	25.3	22.6	31.6	44.5	35.1	39.4	28.9	32.8	9.1
AC	29.9	29.8	32.5	40.5	41.0	53.4	52.6	34.1	39.2	7.6
FP	37.9	22.9	31.8	39.1	41.5	35.6	49.7	41.6	37.5	7.9
CV (%)	17.1	22.6	20.2	15.8	13.8	14.2	12.4	16.8

Brasil

Brasil

Forage production in mixed grazing systems of elephant grass with arrowleaf clover or forage peanut1 This work is part of the first author’s Master Dissertation.

Produção de forragem em sistemas forrageiros de capim elefante consorciados com trevo vesiculoso ou amendoim forrageiro

ABSTRACT

Forage production in mixed grazing systems of elephant grass with arrowleaf clover or forage peanut¹ This work is part of the first author’s Master Dissertation.