The Quality of Silage and Yield in Hungarian Vetch and Forage Crops and Rye Intercropping System

Abstract

The aim of the study was to determine silage yield and quality of Hungarian vetch/forage pea (V/P) with rye (R) mixed in an intercropping system that provides maximum level of faulting from the field. The field experiment was conducted in 2021-2022 to examine the effects of different binary sowing ratio (20:80%R/P, 40:60%R/P, 60:40%R/P; 80:20%R/P; 20:80%R/V, 40:60%R/V, 60:40%R/V; 80:20%R/V, 100%R, 100%P, 100%V) in 3 replications. The treatments were harvested in July 2022 for silage, and hay yield and fresh yield were determined in the intercropping treatments before ensiling. On the same day, silages were filled by the same mix ratios in plastic cans. After fermentation, the dry matter ratio, pH, sucrose, crude protein, ADF, NDF, mineral matters and organic acid were defined in silages. Before ensiling the highest fresh and dry yield were obtained from 80:20%R/P. Yield values were decreased by increase of rye ratio in the mix. The dry matter, crude protein, lactic acid formation, the inhibition of undesirable micro‐organisms and nutritional quality has been improved in rye silages prepared with H. vetch and F. pea contribute. Consequently, the combinations of the H. vetch and F. pea contribute to rye silage are complementary, and the intercropping of the binary combination made profitable forage yield and silage quality, according to sole treatments. The positive effects in the investigated parameters are in all mixed ratios, but, 80:20R/P, 60:40R/P and 80:20R/V silages were more superior to the others.

Keywords

• Intercropping system
• mix silage
• rye
• legumes
• silage quality

References

1. Ahemad M, Zaidi A, Saghir Khan M, Oves M (2009). Biological importance of phosphorus and phosphate solubilizing microbes - an overview. In: Khan MS, Zaidi A (editor). Phosphate Solubilising Microbes for Crop Improvement, Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Newyork, USA:1-14.
2. Alcicek A, Özkan K (1997). Determination of silage quality for silo feed. First Turkish Sillage Conference, Bursa, Turkey, 241-246.
3. Amado IR, Fuciños C, Fajardo P, Guerra NP, Pastrana L (2012). Evaluation of two bacteriocin-producing probiotic lactic acid bacteria as inoculants for controlling Listeria monocytogenes in grass and maize silages. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 175: 137-149, 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2012.05.006.
4. Amaefule KU, Ukpanah UA, Ibok AE (2011). Performance of starter broilers fed raw pigeon pea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] seed meal diets supplemented with lysine and or methionine. International Journal of Poultry Science, 10(3): 205-211. doi: 10.3923/ijps.2011.205.211.
5. Amaral RC, Pires AV, Susin I, Nussio LG, Mendes CQ, Gastaldello Junior AL (2009). Cana-de-açúcar ensilada com ou sem aditivos químicos: fermentação e composição química. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 38(8): 1413-1421. doi: 10.1590/S1516-35982009001000001.
6. Arnoud MJ (2008). Update on the assessment of magnesium status. British Journal of Nutrition, 99(3): 24-36. Auerbach H, Weiss K, Theobald P, Nadeau E (2013). Effects of inoculant type on dry matter losses, fermentation pattern, yeast count and aerobic stability of green rye silages. In: Proceedings of the 12. BOKU-Symposium Tierernährung, Vienna, Austria, 179-185.
7. Baležentienė L, Mikulionienė S (2006). Chemical composition of galega mixtures silages. Agronomy Research, 4(2): 483–492.
8. Balieiro Neto G, Siqueira, GR, Reis RA, Nogueira JR, Roth MdTP, Roth APdTP (2007). Óxido de cálcio como aditivo na ensilagem de cana-de-açúcar. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 35(3): 1231-1239. doi: 10.1590/S1516-35982007000600003.

9. Basaran U, Copur Doğrusöz M, Gülümser E, Mut H (2017). Hay yield and quality of intercropped sorghum-sudan grass hybrid and legumes with different seed ratio. Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 22(1): 47-53. DOI: 10.17557/tjfc.301834.
10. Basaran U, Gülümser E, Mut H, Copur Doğrusöz M (2018). Determination of silage yield and quality of grasspea + cereal intercrops. Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 6 (9): 1237-1242. doi: 10.24925/turjaf. Doi:v6i9.1237-1242.2022.
11. Broberg A, Jacobsson K, Ström K, Schnürer J (2007). Metabolite profiles of lactic acid bacteria in grass silage. Appl Environ Microbiol, 73: 5547–5552. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02939-06.
12. Lithourgidis AS, Dordas CA, Damalas CA, Vlachostergios DN (2011). Annual intercrops: An alternative pathway for sustainable agriculture. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 5: 396– 410.
13. Seydoşoğlu S (2019). Investigation of the Effect of Fodder Pea (Pisum sativum L.) and Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) Herbages Mixed at Different Rates on Silage and Feed Quality. Ege Univ. Jour. Agri. Fac., 56(3): 297-302, DOI: 10.20289/zfdergi.485698.
14. Comino L, Tabacco E, Righi F, Revello-Chion A, Quarantelli A, Borreani G (2014). Effects of an inoculant containing a Lactobacillus buchneri that produces ferulate-esterase on fermentation products, aerobic stability, and fibre digestibility of maize silage harvested at different stages of maturity. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 198: 94–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2014.10.001.
15. Costa NR, Andreotti M, Buzetti S, Lopes KSM, Dos Santos FG, Pariz CM (2014). Acúmulo de macronutrientes e decomposição da palhada de braquiárias em razão da adubação nitrogenada durante e após o consórcio com a cultura do milho. Revista Brasileira de Ciência, 38: 1223–1233.
16. Crusciol CAC, Nascente AS, Mateus GP, Borghi E, Leles EP, Santos ND (2013). Effect of intercropping on yields of corn with different relative maturities and palisade grass. Agron. J., 105: 599–606.
17. Daniel JLP, Weiß K, Custódio L, Sá Neto A, Santos MC, Zopollatto M, Nussio LG (2013). Occurrence of volatile organic compounds in sugarcane silages. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 185: 101–105.
18. Dumlu Gul Z, Tan M (2013). Using legume forage crops for silage. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Atatürk University, 44(1):189-193.
19. Ferraretto LF, Fonseca AC, Sniffen CJ, Formigoni A, Shaver RD (2015). Effect of corn silage hybrids differing in starch and neutral detergent fiber digestibility on lactation performance and total-tract nutrient digestibility by dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 98: 395-405.
20. Filya I (2001). Silage technology, Hakan Ofset Press, İzmir.
21. Galanopoulou K, Lithourgidis AS, Dordas CA (2019). Intercropping of faba bean with barley at various spatial arrangements affects dry matter and N yield, nitrogen nutrition index, and interspecific competition. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca, 47:1116–1127.
22. Gianoli E, Ramos I, Alfaro-Tapia A, Valdéz Y, Echegaray ER, Yábar E (2006). Benefits of a maize–bean–weeds mixed cropping system in Urubamba Valley, Peruvian Andes. International Journal of Pest Management, 52(4): 283-289, DOI: 10.1080/09670870600796722.
23. Guo XS, Ke WC, Ding WR, Ding LM, Xu DM, Wang WW (2018). Profiling of metabolome and bacterial community dynamics in ensiled Medicago sativa inoculated without or with Lactobacillus plantarum or Lactobacillus buchneri. Scientific Reports, 8: 357.
24. Gülümser E, Mut H, Başaran U, Doğrusöz MC (2021a). An assessment of ensiling potential in maize x legume (soybean and cowpea) binary mixtures for yield and feeding quality. Turkish Journal of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, 45(3): 21. https://doi.org/10.3906/vet-2006-43.
25. Gulumser E, Mut H, Başaran U, Doğrusöz MC (2021b). Determination of Quality Traits of Silages Obtained of Forage Pea and Oats in Different Ratios. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, 11(1): 763-770.
26. Iqbal MA, Iqbal A, Ahmad Z, Raza A, Rahim J, Imran M, Sheikh UAA, Maqsood Q, Soufang W, Sahloulh NMA, Sorourh S, El Sabag A (2021). Cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp] herbage yield and nutritional quality in cowpea-sorghum mixed strip intercropping systems. Revista Mexicana Ciencias Pecuarias, 12(2): 402-418. https://doi.org/10.22319/rmcp.v12i2.4918.
27. Jeroch D, Drochner W, Simon O (1999). Ernährung landwirtschaflichen Nutztiere. Berlin, Springer Verlag, 544. Kidambi SP, Matches AG, Karnezos TP, Keeling JW (1993). Mineral concentrations in forage sorghum grown under two harvest management systems. Agronomy Journal, 85: 826-833.
28. König W, König E, Elo K, Vanhatalo A, Jaakkola S (2019). Effects of sodium nitrite treatment on the fermentation quality of red clover - grass silage harvested at two dry matter concentrations and inoculated with clostridia. Agriculture and Food Science, 28:155-164. doi: 10.23986/afsci.85114.
29. König W, König E, Elo K, Vanhatalo A, Jaakkola S (2019). Effects of sodium nitrite treatment on the fermentation quality of red clover - grass silage harvested at two dry matter concentrations and inoculated with clostridia. Agriculture and Food Science, 28: 155-164. doi: 10.23986/afsci.85114.
30. Li P, Ji S, Hou C, Tang H, Wang Q, Shen Y (2016). Effects of chemical additives on the fermentation quality and N distribution of alfalfa silage in the south of China. Animal Science Journal, 87: 1472–1479. doi: 10.1111/asj.12600.
31. Lienhard P, Lestrelin G, Phanthanivong I, Kiewvongphachan X, Leudphanane B, Lairez J, Quoc HT, Castella JC (2020). Opportunities and constraints for adoption of maize-legume mixed cropping systems in Laos. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 18(5): 427-443, DOI: 10.1080/14735903.2020.1792680.
32. Lima R, Lourenço M, Díaz RF, Castro A, Fievez V (2010). Effect of combined ensiling of sorghum and soybean with or without molasses and lactobacilli on silage quality and in vitro rumen fermentation. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 155: 122-131, 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2009.10.008.
33. Lithourgidis AS, Dordas CA (2010). Forage yield, growth rate and nitrogen uptake of wheat, barley and rye-faba bean intercrops in three seeding ratios. Crop Science, 50(5): 2148-2158.
34. Lithourgidis AS, Dhima KV, Vasilakoglou LB, Dordasc CA, Yiakoulaki MD (2007). Sustainable production of barley and wheatby intercropping common vetch, Agron. Sustainable Development, 27: 95–99.
35. Lopes J, Evangelista, AR (2010). Características bromatológicas, fermentativas e população de leveduras de silagens de cana-de-açúcar acrescidas de ureia e aditivos absorventes de umidade. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 39(5): 984-991. doi: 10.1590/S1516-35982010000500007.
36. Melesse A, Steingass H, Schollenberger M, Holstein J, Rodehutscord M (2017). Nutrient compositions and in vitro methane production profiles of leaves and whole pods of twelve tropical multipurpose tree species cultivated in Ethiopia. Agroforestry Systems, 93: 135–147.
37. Minson D (2012). Forage in ruminant nutrition (Vol. 1), New York, NY: Academic Press.
38. Mut H, Gülümser E, Doğrusöz M, Başaran U (2020). Determination of Silage Quality of Narbon Vetch (Vicia narbonensis L.) and Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum L.) Mixtures. ÇOMÜ Journal of Agriculture Faculty, 8 (2): 391-396.
39. Neres MA, Castagnara DD, Silva FB, Oliveira PSR, Mesquita EE, Bernardi TC, Vogt ASL (2012). Características produtivas, estruturais e bromatológicas dos capins Tifton 85 e Piatã e do feijão-guandu cv. Super N, em cultivo singular ou em associação. Ciência Rural, 42(5): 862-869. doi: 10.1590/S0103-84782012000500017.
40. NRC (2001). Nutrient Requirements of Dairy Cattle, (7th rev ed). Natl. Acad. Sci., Washington DC. Panyasak A, Tumwasorn S (2013). Effect of Moisture Content and Storage Time on Sweet. Walailak Journal of Science and Technology, 12(3): 237-243.
41. Pariz CM, Costa C, Crusciol C.AC, Meirelles PRL, Castilhos AM, Andreotti M, Costa NR, Martello JM, Souza DM, Sarto JRW, et al. (2016). Production and Soil Responses to Intercropping of Forage Grasses with Corn and Soybean Silage. Agronomy Journal, 108: 2541–2553.
42. Pedroso A F, Nussio LG, Paziani SF, Loures DRS, Igarasi MS, Coelho RM, Gomes LH (2005). Fermentation and epiphytic microflora dynamics in sugar cane silage. Scientia Agricola, 62(5): 427-432. doi: 10.1590/S0103-90162005000500003.
43. Rezende AV, Rabelo CHS, Rabelo FHS, Nogueira DA, Faria Junior DCNA, Barbosa LA (2011). Perdas fermentativas e estabilidade aeróbia de silagens de cana-de-açúcar tratadas com cal virgem e cloreto de sódio. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 40(4): 739-746. doi: 10.1590/S1516-35982011000400006.
44. Ribeiro LSO, Pires AJV, Carvalho GGP, Santos AB, Ferreira AR, Bonomo P, Silva FF (2010). Composição química e perdas fermentativas de silagem de cana-de-açúcar tratada com ureia ou hidróxido de sódio. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 39(9): 1911-1918. doi: 10.1590/S1516-35982010000900008.
45. Siqueira GR, Roth MdTP, Moretti MH, Benatti JMB, Resende FD (2012). Uso da cana-de-açúcar na alimentação de ruminantes. Revista Brasileira de Saúde e Produção Animal, 13(4): 991-1008. doi: 10.1590/S1519-99402012000400011.
46. Tekeli A, Ates S (2005). Yield potential and mineral composition of white clover (Trifolium repens L.) – tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) mixtures. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 6: 27-34.
47. Tharangani H, Lu C, Zhao L, Ma L, Guo X, Weiss WP, Bu D (2020). Estimation of between-cow variability in nutrient digestion of lactating dairy cows fed corn-based diets. Animals, 10(8): 1363. 10.3390/ani10081363.
48. Trailokya A, Srivastava A, Bhole M, Zalte N (2017). Calcium and Calcium Salts. Journal of the Association of Physicians of India, 100-102.
49. Yogeshpriya S, Selvara P (2018). Mastery of Potassium Status and Their Consequences of Hypokalemia in Dairy Cattle. Shanlax International Journal of Veterinary Science, 5(3): 1-5.
50. Zheng ML, Niu DZ, Jiang D, Zuo SS, Xu CC (2017). Dynamics of microbial community during ensiling direct-cut alfalfa with and without LAB inoculant and sugar. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 122: 1456–1470. doi: 10.1111/jam.13456.