Silage Yield and Quality of Forage Peas and Hungarian Vetch and Triticale Binary Mixtures

Abstract

This study was conducted in order to determine silage quality in binary mixtures of forage pea (Pisum sativum ssp. arvense L. "FP") and Hungarian vetch (Vicia pannonica C. "HV") and triticale (X triticosecale Wittmack. "T") in 2021-2022 vegetation period. Hungarian vetch and forage pea and triticale seeds were sown in 6 different mixture ratios (legume/triticale; 100%/0, 80/20%, 60/40%, 40/60%, 20/80%). The experiment was established according to randomized blocks experimental design with 3 replications. In the study, dry matter content, pH, flieg score, quality class, crude protein, ADF, NDF, Ca, K, Mg, P, lactic acid and acetic acid contents were analyzed for silage yield and quality. The dry matter of silages was between 23.83 and 36.49%, while the pH was between 4.57 and 5.18. The highest crude protein was determined in pure forage peas (22%) and it was determined that it increased in parallel with the increase in the legume ratio in the mixture. Mineral contents were found to be high in sole and intense legume silages, similar to crude protein. In terms of silage quality in the examined parameters, mixed sowing gave better results than sole sowing. As a result of the study, 80:20 T/HV mixture ratio sowing is recommended for Yozgat and regions with similar ecology in terms of silage yield and quality.

Keywords

• Hungarian vetch
• triticale
• forage pea
• silage quality.

Supporting Institution

YOBU, Project Coordination Application and Research Center

Project Number

FYL-2022-1062

Ethical Statement

No

Thanks

This study was produced from Ahmet Mirza's thesis work. We would like to thank Graduate Education Institute and Project Coordination Application and Research Center in YOBU for their contributions.

References

1. Abeidy Z (2022). The effects of lactobacillus brevis inoculation into hungarian vetch, oat and mix silages on silage quality and aerobic stability. Master's Thesis, Ahi Evran University (unpublished), Türkiye.
2. Açıkbaş S (2022). Determination of herbage and silage characteristics of branched millet (Panicum virgatum L.) varieties at different mowing cycles. PhD Thesis, Siirt University (unpublished), Türkiye.
3. Akgül B (2010). The effects of lactic acid bacteria and enzyme mixture inoculants on fermentation properties and feed value in low dry matter corn silages. Master's Thesis, Namık Kemal University (unpublished), Türkiye.
4. Alaca B, ÖzaslanParlak AÖ (2017). Effects of corn, sorghum sudan grass hFPrid and soFPean, cowpea and guarin mixed plantings on silage yield and quality. Journal of Çomü Faculty of Agriculture 5(1): 99-104.
5. Alcicek A and Ozdogan M (1997). A Research on determination of silage quality in corn and barley silo feeds made under farmer conditions. Journal of Animal Production 37(1): 94-102.
6. Anonymous (2023). Yozgat Long years (1929-2021) and (2021-2022) Years Meteorological Information, https://www.mgm.gov.tr. (access date: 15.12.2022) Anonymous (1987). Bewertung Von Grünfutter, Silage Und Heu. DLG-Merkblatt, No. 224. Dlg-Verlag, Frankfurt/M.
7. Arslan M and Çakmakçı S (2011). Comparison of corn (Zea mays L.) and sorghum silages made with different plants. Akdeniz University, Faculty of Agriculture Journal 24(1): 47-53.
8. Ashbell G (1997). Whole wheat plants for silage in sub-tropical climate. Turkey First Silage Proceedings. September 16-19, 1997, Bursa; Türkiye.

9. Aykan Y, Saruhan V (2018). Determination of silage quality characteristics of different ratios of ensiled mixtures of forage pea (Pisum sativum L.) and barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Dicle University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Journal Article 11(2): 64-70.
10. Balabanlı C, Albayrak S, Türk M, Yüksel O (2010). a research on determination of hay yields and silage qualities of some vetch plus cereal mixtures. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 15(2): 204-209.
11. Başaran U, Gülümser E, Mut H, ÇopurDoğrusöz M (2018). Determination of silage yield and quality of damson + cereal mixtures. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology 6(9): 1237-1242.
12. Ceyhan E, Karadaş S (2023). Forage pea pure lines: Winter hardiness, high seed and biological yield. Selcuk Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences 37 (3): 487–496.
13. Ceyhan E, Kahraman A, Ates MK, Karadaş S (2012). Stability analysis on seed yield and its components in peas. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, 18 (6): 887-893.
14. Eğritaş Ö, ÖnalAşcı Ö (2017). Determination of some mineral matter content of common vetch-grain mixtures. Academic Journal of Agriculture 4(1): 13-18.
15. Elçi S (1975). Vetch (Vicia) agriculture. Food, Agriculture and Livestock Presidency, General Directorate of Agriculture Publications no: D- 167, Ankara.
16. Erbil IN (2012). The effects of homofermentative and/or heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria inoculants on the fermentation, and aerobic stability characteristics of hungarian vetch-wheat silages. Master's Thesis, Namık Kemal University (unpublished), Türkiye.
17. Filya İ ( 2002). Effects of lactic acid bacteria and lactic acid bacteria+enzyme mixture silage inoculants on corn silage. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences 26: 679-687.
18. Gomes ALM, Jacovaci F, A, Bolson DC, Nussio LG, Jobim CC, Daniel JLP (2019). Effects of light wilting and heterolactic inoculant on the formation of volatile organic compounds, fermentative losses and aerobic stability of oat silage. Animal Feed Science and Technology 247: 194-198.
19. Görü N, Seydoşoğlu S (2021). Determination of silage quality characteristics in mixtures of some cool climate cereals (oat, barley, rye and triticale) with common vetch at different ratios. Journal of Faculty of Agriculture, Isparta University of Applied Sciences 16(1): 26-33.
20. Gümüştaş M, Turan N (2022). Investigation of the effect of some cereals mixed with forage pea (Pisum sativum l.) at different ratios on silage quality. Ispec Journal of Agricultural Sciences 6(1): 118-130.
21. Jang WS, Yang BM, Heo JM, Lee HS, Lee SK (2015). Effects of supplementation of hairy vetch on the quality of whole crop barley silage. Korean Journal of Agricultural Science 42(4): 383-388.
22. Karadeniz E, Eren A, Saruhan V (2020). Determination of silage quality of damson (Lathyrus sativus L.) and triticale (X triticosecale Wittmack) mixtures. Ispec Journal of Agricultural Sciences 4(2): 114-124.
23. Kavut YT, Soya H, Geren H, Ünsal R, Sevim İ, Avcıoğlu R (2012). Research on silage yield and silage quality characteristics of some triticale varieties grown under Menemen conditions. Ege University Faculty of Agriculture Anatolian Aegean Agricultural Research Institute Journal 22(1): 33-44.
24. Kaymak G, Gülümser E, Can M, Acar Z, Ayan İ. (2021). Determination of silage quality of leafy and semi-leafy forage pea varieties and annual grass mixtures. Journal of Iğdır University Institute of Science and Technology 11(2): 1595-1602.
25. Keleş G, Alataş MS, Ateş S. (2013). Nutrient value and fermentation characteristics of alfalfa and hungarian vetch silages ensiled with silage additives. VII. National Animal Nutrition Congress, September 26-27, 2013 Ankara, Türkiye.
26. Kidambi SP, Matches AG, Gricgs TC (1989). Variability for ca,mg,k,cu,zn and k/(ca+mg) ratioamong 3 wheat grasses and sainfoin on thes out hern high plains. Journal of Range Management 42(2): 316-322.
27. Kidambi SP, Matches AG, Karnezos TP, Keeling JW (1993). Mineral concentrations in forage sorghum grown under two harvest management systems. Agronomy Journal 85(4): 826-833.
28. Marković J, Blagojević M, Kostić I, Vasić T, Anđelković S, Petrović M, Štrbanović R (2018). Effect of bacterial inoculants application and seeding rate on common vetch-oat silage quality. Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry 34(2): 251-257.
29. Mut H, Gülümser E, Çopur Doğrusöz M, Başaran U (2020). The effect of different companion plants on alfalfa silage quality. Ksü Journal of Agriculture and Nature 23(4): 975-980.
30. Paydaş M (2018). Determination of quality, nutrient composition and digestion of silages obtained from a mixture of barley and vetch plants harvested at different periods. Master's Thesis, Harran University (unpublished), Türkiye.
31. Panyasak A, Tumwasorn S. (2013). Effect of Moisture Content and Storage Time on Sweet Corn Waste Silage Quality. Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand. Agricultural Technology and Biological Sciences, Walailak J Sci & Tech 2015; 12(3): 237-243
32. Polat M (2022). Determination of silage quality of different mixtures of forage pea (PisumSativum L.) and oat (Avena Sativa L.) in Şanlıurfa province. Master's Thesis, Harran University (unpublished), Türkiye.
33. Romero JJ, Zhao Y, Balseca-Paredes MA, Tiezzi F, Gutierrez-Rodriguez E, Castillo MS (2017). Laboratory silo type and inoculation effects on nutritional composition, fermentation, and bacterial and fungal communities of oat silage. Journal of Dairy Science 100(3): 1812-1828.
34. Tekeli AS, Ateş E (2005). Yield potential and mineral composition of white clover (Trifolium Repens L.)-tall fescue (Festuca Arundinacea Schreb.) mixtures. Journal of Central European Agriculture 6(1):27-34.
35. Turan N (2018). Determination of the effect of different mixing ratios of Hungarian vetch and wheat grown in the ecological conditions of Eastern Anatolia region on silage quality. Siirt University, Engineering and Natural Sciences 12: 99-107.
36. Yavuz H (2022). Determination of silage quality of different mixtures of forage pea (Pisum sativum l.) and barley (Hordeum Vulgare L.) in Şanlıurfa province. Master's Thesis, Harran University (unpublished), Türkiye.
37. Yildirim F (2020). Determination of yield and yield components and some silage properties of some annual legume forage crops. ISPECC Journal of Agricultural Sciences 4(3): 477-491.