Effect of Different Ratios of Hungarian Vetch with Cereal Crop Mixtures on Hay Nutrient Value

Year 2018, Volume: 2 - Special Issue - International Conference on Science and Technology (ICONST 2018), 59 - 70, 31.12.2018

Firat Alatürk Ahmet Gökkuş Harun Baytekin Altıngül Özaslan Parlak Selçuk Birer

https://doi.org/10.30516/bilgesci.488174

Cited By: 3

Abstract

Abstract: This
study has been conducted in order to determine the variations in digestibility
and energy values of hay depending on the application of Hungarian vetch-cereal
crop mixtures at different ratios. The research has been carried out in
Canakkale in 2009–2011. The study has been designed according to randomized
complete block design, and the plots were arranged as single and mixed (3:1,
2:2, 1:3 Hungarian vetch: cereal)  crop
sowing systems by using three replications with sowing Hungarian vetch mixing
with barley, wheat, oats and triticale. Raw cellulose (RC), digestible dry
matter (DDM), total digestible nutrients (TDDM), metabolic energy (ME), net
energy (NEL) and relative feed value (RFV) like characteristics have been
examined in this research. As the result of this research, the ratios of hay
raw cellulose (RC) were not significantly important in accordance to different
forms of sowing, while the values of DDM, TDDM, ME, NEL and RFV in hay were
found higher in mixed sowing system than that of single sowing of cereal crops.
In the study, it has been concluded that for being able to produce hay
containing high nutrient value in the mixtures of Hungarian vetch with cereals
then the mixture of wheat with Hungarian vetch with the ratio of 3: 1 would be
suitable to sow.

Keywords

Mixtures, forage, Hungarian vetch, barley, oat, wheat

References

• Aasen, A., Baron, V.S., Clayton, G.W., Dick, A.C., McCartney, D.H. 2004. Swath grazing potential of spring cereals, field pea and mixtures with other species. Can. J. Plant Sci., 84, 1051–1058.Adams, R.S. 1994. Penn State Professor Emeritus of Dairy Science, for Use in Forage and Feed-Testing Schemes. Revised, 1994.Ahmad, A. 2006. Agro-qualitative Studies on Spring Planted Forage Sorghum İntegrated with Forage Legumes in different Geometrical Arrangements. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Agron. Uni. of Agri., Faisalabad, Pakistan, p. 157.Ajayi, F.T., Babayemi, O.J. 2008. Comparative in vitro evaluation of mixtures of panicum maximum cv ntchisi with stylo (Stylosanthes guianensis), Lablab (Lablab purpureus), Centro (Centrosema pubescens) and Histrix (Aeschynomene histrix). Livestock Research for Rural Development, 20(6). Albayrak, S., Ekiz, H. 2005. An ınvestigation on the establishment of artificial pasture under ankara’s ecological conditions. Turkish J. Agric. and Forestry, 29, 69-74.Altın, M., Gökkuş, A., Koç, A. 2005. Çayır Mera Islahı. T.C. Tarım ve Köy İşleri Bakanlığı, Tarımsal Üretim ve Geliştirme Genel Müdürlüğü, 468 s. Anonim, 2015. http://www.muratgorgulu.com.tr/altekran.asp?id=97.Avcı, M. 2000. Çukurova’da Geçici Yapay Mera Kurma Amacıyla Yetiştirilebilecek Kışlık Çok Yıllık Buğdaygil+Baklagil Yem Bitkileri Karışımlarının Saptanması (Doktora Tezi). Çukurova Üni. Fen Bil. Enst. Tarla Bitkileri ABD, Adana.Aydın, R., Kamalak, A., Canbolat, O. 2007. Effect of maturity on the potential nutritive value of bur medic hay. Journal of Biological Sciences, 7 (2), 300-304.Babayemi, O.J., Bamikole, M.A. 2006. Effects of tephrosia candida dc leaf and its mixtures with guinea grass on the in vitro fermentation changes as feed for ruminants in Nigeria. Pakistan J. Nutrition, 5 (1), 14-18.Bakhashwain, A.A. 2010. Fodder yield and quality of rhodes grass-alfalfa mixtures as affected by sowing rates in Makkah Region. JKAU: Met., Env. & Arid Land Agric. Sci., 21(1), 19-33. Bakoğlu, A. 2004. Farklı oranlarda ekilen adi fiğ (Vicia sativa L.) ve Arpa (Hordeum vulgare L.) karışımlarında biyolojik verim ve arazi kullanım etkinliğinin belirlenmesi. Fırat Üni. Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi, 2(3), 44–48.Bakoğlu, A., Memiş, A. 2002. Farklı oranlarda ekilen adi fiğ (Vicia sativa L.) ve Arpa (Hordeum vulgare L.) karışımlarında tohum verimi ve bazı özelliklerin belirlenmesi. Fırat Üni. Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Derg., 14(1), 29-35.Barnett, F., Posler, G.L. 1983. Performance of cool-season perennial grasses in pure stands and in mixtures with legumes. Agronomy J., 75(4), 582-586.Blümmel, M., Karslı, A., Russell, J.R. 2003. Influence of diet on growth yields of rumen micro-organisms in vitro and in vivo: ınfluence on growth yield of variable carbon fluxes to fermentation products. British J. of Nutr., 90, 625–634.Buxton, D.R. 1990. Cell-wall components in divergent germplasm of four perennial forage grass species. Crop Sci., 30, 402-408.Buxton, D.R., Redfearn, D.D. 1996. Plant Limitations to Fiber Digestion and Utilization. 37th Annual Ruminant Nut. Conf., Washington, p: 814-818.Büyükburç, U., Karadağ, Y. 2002. The amount of no3-n transferred to soil by legumes, forage and seed yield, and the forage quality of annual legume-triticale mixtures. Turk. Agric. For., 26, 281-288.Büyükburç, U., Munzur, M., Akman, R. 1989. Tek yıllık baklagil yem bitkileri+tahıl karışımlarının samsun ili ekim nöbeti içindeki yeri üzerinde araştırmalar. Tarla Bitkileri Merkez Araştırma Enst., Yayın No: 7, Ankara. Canbolat, Ö., Karaman, Ş. 2009. Bazı baklagil kaba yemlerinin in vitro gaz üretimi, organik madde sindirilebilirliği, nispi yem değeri ve metabolik enerji içeriklerinin karşılaştırılması. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 15(2), 188-195.Carr, P.M., Horsley, R.D., Poland, W.W. 2004. Barley, Oat, and Cereal-Pea Mixtures as dryland forages in the northern great plains. Agronomy J., 96, 677–684. Chapko, L.B., Brinkman, M.A., Albrecht, K.A. 1991. Oat, oat–pea, barley, and barley–pea for forage yield, forage quality, and alfalfa establishment. J. Prod. Agric., 4, 486–491.Cherney, J.H., Hall, M.H. 2008. Forage Quality in Perspective. Penn State Extension, Agronomy Facts 30, 4p.Cone, J.W., Van Gelder, A.H., Soliman, I.A., De Visser, H., Van Vuuren, A.M. 1999. Different techniques to study rumen fermentation characteristics of maturing grass and grass silage. J. Dairy Sci., 82, 957-966.Düzgüneş, O., Kesici, T., Kavuncu, O., Gürbüz, F. 1987. Araştırma ve Deneme Metotları (İstatistik Metotları II). Ankara Üni. Ziraat Fak. Yay.: 1021, Ders Kitabı: 295, 381 s.Filya, İ., Karabulut, A., Canbolat, O., Değirmencioğlu, T., Kalkan, H. 2002. Bursa Bölgesinde Yetiştirilen Yem Hammaddelerinin Besleme Değeri ve Hayvansal Organizmada Optimum Değerlendirme Koşullarının in vivo ve in vitro Yöntemlerle Saptanması Üzerinde Araştırmalar. U.Ü. Ziraat Fakültesi Bilimsel Araştırmalar ve İncelemeler Serisi. No:25, Bursa, 1-16.Gökkuş, A. 1994. Türkiye’nin kaba yem üretiminde çayır-mera ve yem bitkilerinin yeri ve önemi. Atatürk Üni. Ziraat Fak. Derg., 25, 250-261.Gökkuş, A., Koç, A. 1996. Doğu anadolu bölgesinde tarımsal yapı. Türkiye 3. Çayır Mera ve Yem Bitkileri Kongresi, 17–19 Haziran 1996, Erzurum, 22–31.Gürsoy, E., Macit, M. 2014. Erzurum ili meralarında doğal olarak yetişen bazı buğdaygil yem bitkilerinin in vitro gaz üretim değerlerinin belirlenmesi. YYU J AGR SCI., 24(3), 218-227.Hanna, W.W., Monson, W.G., Burton, G.W. 1973. Histological examination of fresh forage leaves after in vitro digestion. Crop Sci., 13, 98-102.Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Knudsen, M.T., Jorgensen, J.R., Jensen, E.S. 2006. Intercropping wheat with pea for ımproved wheat baking quality. Proceedings of the European Joint Organic Congress, Odense, Denmark, p. 268–269.Horrocks, R.D., Vallentine, J.F. 1999. Harvested Forages. Academic Pres, UK.Höflich, G., Kühn, G., Meinsen, C., Schuppenies, R., Schafer, E., Stitz, K. 1990. Approaches to a greater use of biological nitrogen fixation in legume-grass mixtures. Archiv f.r Acker und Pflanzenbau und Bodenkunde, 34: 701-707.Jung, H.G., Allen, M.S. 1995. Characteristics of plant cell walls affecting intake and digestibility of forages by ruminants. J. Animal Sci., 73, 2774-2790.Karabulut, A., Canbolat, Ö., Kalkan, H., Gürbüzol, F., Sucu, E., Filya, İ. 2007. Comparison of in vitro Gas Production, Metabolizable Energy, Organic Matter Digestibility and Microbial Protein Production of Some Legume Hays. Asian-Agust. J. Anim. Sci., 20(4), 517-522.Lauriault, L.M., Kirksey, R.E. 2004. Yield and nutritive value of ırrigated winter cereal forage grass-legume ıntercrops in the southern high plains, USA. Agronomy J., 96, 352-358.Lithourgidis, A.S., Vasilakoglou, I.B., Dhima, K.V., Dordas, C.A., Yiakoulaki, M.D. 2006. Forage yield and quality of common vetch mixtures with oat and triticale in two seeding ratios. Field Crops Res., 99, 106-113.NRC, 2001. National Research Council. Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle (7th Rev. ed.).National Academic Sci., Washington, DC.Pınarcık, N. l992. Yem Bezelyesi (Pisum arvense L.) ve Arpa (Hordeum vulgare L.) Karışım Oranlarının Belirlenmesi ve Ot Verimleri Üzerinde Araştırmalar (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Selçuk Üni., Fen Bilimleri Enst., Tarla Bitkileri ABD, Konya.Roberts, C.A, Moore, K.J., Johnson, K.D. 1989. Forage quality and yield of wheat-common vetch at different stages of maturity and common vetch seeding rate. Agronomy J., 81, 57–60.Sadeghpour, A., Jahanzad, E., Lithourgidis, A.S., Hashemi, M., Esmaeili, A., Hosseini, M.B. 2014. Forage yield and quality of barley-annual medic ıntercrops in semi-arid environments. Int. J. Plant Prod., 8, 77–89.Sanderson, M. 2010. Nutritive value and herbage accumulation rates of pastures sown to grass, legume, and chicory mixtures. Agron. J., 102, 728–733.Sanderson, M.A., Wedin, W.F. 1989. Phenological stage and herbage quality relationships in temperate grasses and legumes. Agronomy J., 81, 864-869.Schmidt, L. 1993. Use of plant height for determining the nutritive value, yield and the optimal use span of lucerne. Proceedings of the XVII International Grassland Congress, New Zealand, p: 869-870.Smith, L.W., Goering, H.K., Gordon, C.H. 1972. Relationships of forage compositions with rates of cell digestion and digestibility of cell walls. J. Dairy Sci., 55, 1140-1147.Taiz, L., Zeiger, E. 2007. Bitki Fizyolojisi. Palme Yayıncılık, Ankara, 690 s.Tan, M., Menteşe, Ö. 2003. Yem bitkilerinde anatomik yapı ve kimyasal kompozisyonun besleme değerine etkileri. Atatürk Üni. Ziraat Fak. Derg., 34 (1), 97–103.Tan, M., Serin, Y. 1996. Değişik fiğ+tahıl karışımları için en uygun karışım oranı ve biçim zamanının belirlenmesi üzerine bir araştırma. Atatürk Üni. Ziraat Fak. Dergisi, 27(4), 475-489.Taş, N. 2010. Determination of optimum mixture rate and cutting time for vetch+wheat mixtures sown in spring and autumn under ırrigated conditions. II. Hay Quality. Anadolu J. of AARI, 20(2), 59-69.Ullah, M.A. 2010. Forage Production in Panicum Grass-Legumes Intercropping By Combining Geometrical Configuration, Inoculation and Fertilizer under Rainfed Conditions (Ph.D. Thesis). University of Kassel, Germany.Van Soest, P.J. 1994. Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant. In; Fiber and Physicochemical Properties of Feeds (2nd ed.), Ed.: P.J. Van Soest, Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London, pp. 140-155.Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.D., Lewis, B.A. 1991. Methods 1 for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Science, 74, 3583–3597.Wilson, J.R. 1993. Organization of Forage Plant Tissues. In: Forage Cell Wall Structure and Digestibility, Eds.: H.G. Jung, D.R. Buxton, R.D. Hatfield, J. Ralph. American Society of Agronomy, Inc. Madison, Wisconsin, USA, p: 1–32.Yıldırım, S., Özaslan Parlak A. 2016. Tritikale ile bezelye, bakla ve fiğ karışım oranlarının belirlenerek yem verimi ve kalitesine etkileri. ÇOMÜ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(1), 77-83.Yılmaz, Ş., Özel, A., Atak, M., Erayman, M. 2015. Effects of seeding rates on competition ındices of barley and vetch ıntercropping systems in the eastern mediterranean. Turk J. Agric. For., 39, 135-143.Yisehak, K. 2008. Effect of seed proportions of rhodes grass (chloris gayana) and white sweet clover (Melilotus alba) at sowing on agronomic characteristics and nutritional quality. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 20(2), 28. Zhang, F., Li, L. 2003. Using competitive and facilitative ınteractions ın ıntercropping systems enhances crop productivity and nutrient-use efficiency. Plant Soil, 248, 305-312.