EVALUATION OF FORAGE TURNIP + CEREAL MIXTURES FOR FORAGE YIELD AND QUALITY TRAITS

Abstract

The most researches in temperate areas has focused mixtures of spring cereals with forage turnip. In this study, forage turnip “FT” with barley “B”, wheat “W” and oat “O” intercropping at different seed rates (100:0%, 75+25%, 50+50%, and 25+75%) were examined for hay yield, protein yield, relative feed value (RFV), condensed tannin, total phenolic, total flavonoid, and mineral contents (K, P, Ca, and Mg) 2019 and 2020 years. The experiment was arranged as a Randomized Complete Block Design with three replications in Bilecik-Turkey. In combined years, the hay yield was ranged between 5.45-10.27 t ha-1. The protein yield was the highest in alone forage turnip (1.43 t ha-1), 75FT+25B% (1.72 t ha-1), 75FT+25O% (1.72 t ha-1), 50FT+50B% (1.49 t ha-1) and 50FT+50O% (1.80 t ha-1). The condensed tannin content was ranged between 1.82-2.83%. The highest RFV was observed in 25FT+75O% (136.29) and 50FT+50O% (125.42) mixtures. As a result, showed that intercropping forage turnip with barley and oat improved the yield and quality of the hay compared to their monocrops in the present study. Accordingly, forage turnip with barley and oat at 75+25% and 50+50% seed rates exhibited the best results regarding forage yield and quality in the Bilecik ecological conditions.

Keywords

• Bilecik
• cereals
• forage turnip
• forage yield
• nutritive value.

References

1. Arvouet-Grand, A., Vennat, B., Pourrat, A and P. Legret 1994. Standardisation d`un extrait de propolis et identification des principaux constituants. J Pharm Belg. 49: 462-468. Acar, Z., Tan, M., Ayan, İ., Önal Aşçı, Ö., Mut, H., Başaran, U., Gülümser, E., Can, M and G. Kaymak. 2020. The situation of forage crops agriculture and ıts development opportunities in Turkey. In: Agricultural Engineers of Turkey IX. Technical Congress, pp: 529-553, Ankara, Turkey.
2. Bal, M.A., Ozturk, D., Aydin, R., Erol, A., Ozkan, C.O., Ata, M., Karakas, E and P. Karabay. 2006. Nutritive Value of Sainfoin (Onobrychis viciaefolia) Harvested at Different Maturity Stages. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 9: 205-209.
3. Barry, T.N., 1987. Secondary compounds of forages. In: Nutrition of Herbivores, ed. Hacker J.B and Ternouth J.H., 91-120, Academic Press, Sydney.
4. Basaran, U., Copur Dogrusoz, M., Gulumser, E and H. Mut. 2017. Hay yield and quality of intercropped sorghum-sudan grass hybrıd and legumes with different seed ratio. Turk J. Field Crops 22 (1): 47-53.
5. Bate-Smith, E.C. 1975. Phytochemistry of proanthocyanidins. Phytochemistry, 14:1107-1113.
6. Bauman, D.T., Bastians, L., Goudrian, J., Vanleur, H.H and M.J. Kroft. 2002. Analysing crop yield and plant quality ın a ıntercropping system useing an eco-physiological model for interplant completition. Agric. Syst. 73: 173-203.
7. Frozza, C.O.S., Garcia, C.S.C., Gambato, G., de Souza M.D., Salvador, M., Moura, S., Padilha, F.F., Seixas, F.K., Collares, T., Borsuk, S., Dellagostin, O.A., Henriques, J.A and M. Roesch-Ely. 2013. Chemical characterization, antioxidant and cytotoxic activities of Brazilian red propolis. Food Chem. Toxicol. 52: 137-142.
8. Geren, H. 2002. Forage Turnip Cultivation, Ege University, Agricultural Application and Research Center, Farmer's Brochure: 21, Bornova, İzmir.

9. Gezer, K., Duru, M.E., Kıvrak, I., Türkoğlu, A., Mercan, N., Türkoğlu H and S. Gülcan. 2006. Free-radical scavenging capacity and antimicrobial activity of wild edible mushroom of Turkey. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 5 (20): 1924-1928.
10. Hook, J.E and G.J. Gascho. 1988. Multiple cropping for efficient use water and nitrogen. In: Cropping strategies for efficient use of water and nitrogen, ed. Hargrove W.L., 7-20. American Soc. of Agron press, Madison, USA.
11. Kidambi, S.P., Matches, A.G and T.C. Gricgs. 1989. Variability for Ca, Mg, K, Cu, Zn and K/(Ca+Mg) ratio among 3 wheat grasses and sainfoin on the southern high plains. J. Range Manag. 42: 316-322.
12. Kökten, K., Kaplan, M., Turan, V., Kale, H., Çaçan, E., Kardeş, Y.M., Tutar, H and E. Tal. 2017. Animal nutrition traits of different acorn species (Quercus sp.). In: 12th Field Crops Congress, pp: 236-240, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey.
13. Kumar, R and M. Singh. 1984. Tannins: Their adverse role in ruminant nutrition. J Agric Food Chem. 32: 447- 453.
14. Kuppusamy, P., Lee, K.D., Song, C.E., Ilavenil, S., Srigopalram, S., Arasu, M.V and K.C. Choi. 2018. Quantification of major phenolic and flavonoid markers in forage crop Lolium multiflorum using HPLC-DAD. Rev. Bras. Farmacogn. 28: 282–288.
15. Lascano, C.E. and E. Cárdenas. 2010. Alternatives for methane emission mitigation in livestock systems. Rev Bras Zootec, 39: 175-182.
16. Lee, S.H.Y., Humphries, D.J., Cockman, D.A., Givens, D.I. and J.P.E. Spencer. 2017. Accumulation of citrus flavanones in bovine milk following citrus pulp incorporation into the diet of dairy cows. EC Nutrition 7(4): 143-154.
17. Lüscher, A., Suter, M and J.A. Finn. 2016. Legumes and grasses in mixtures complement each other ideally for sustainable forage production. J of the Int. Leg. Soc. 12: 8-10.
18. Martin, C., Copani, G., Niderkorn, V., 2016. Impacts of forage legumes on intake, digestion and methane emissions in ruminants. J of the Int. Leg. Soc. 12: 24-25.
19. Mut, H., Gulumser, E., Copur Dogrusoz, M. and U. Basaran. 2017. Forage yield and nutritive value of maize-legume mixtures. Range Manag. Agrofor. 38 (1): 76-81.
20. Mut, Z., Akay, H. and Ö.D. Erbaş Köse. 2015. Hay yield and quality of oat (Avena sativa L.) genotypes of worldwide origin. Int. J. Plant Prod. 9 (4): 507-522.
21. O’Connell, J.E.O and P.F. Fox. 2001. Significance and applications of phenolic compounds in the production and quality of milk and dairy products: a review. Int. Dairy J. 11(3): 103-120.
22. Patra, A.K., Kamra, D.N. and N. Agarwal. 2006. Effect of plant extracts on in vitro methanogenesis, enzyme activities and fermentation of feed in rumen liquor of buffalo. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 128 (3-4): 276–291.
23. Paula, E.M., Samensari, R.B., Machado, E., Pereira, L.M. and F.J. Maia. 2016. Effects of phenolic compounds on ruminal protozoa population, ruminal fermentation, and digestion in water buffaloes. Livest Sci. 185: 136-41.
24. Robbins, R.J. 2003. Phenolic acids in foods. J. Agric. Food Chem. 51: 2866–2887.
25. Rochfort, S., Parker, A.J and F.R. Dunshea. 2008. Plant bioactives for ruminant health and productivity. Phytochemistry 69 (2): 299–322.
26. Rohweder, D.A., R. F. Barnes and N. Jorgeson. 1978. Proposed hay grading standards based on laboratory analyses for evaluating quality. J. Animal Sci. 47: 747-759.
27. Santos Neto, T.M., Mota, R.A., Silva, L.B.G., Viana, D.A., Lima-Filho, J.L., Sarubbo, L.A., Converti, A and A.L.F. Porto. 2009. Susceptibility of Staphylococcus spp. isolated from milk of goats with mastitis to antibiotics and green propolis extracts. Lett Drug Des Discov. 6: 63-68.
28. Seradj, A.R., Abecia, L., Crespo, J., Villalba, D., Fondevila, M and J. Balcells. 2014. The effect of Bioflavex® and its pure flavonoid components on in vitro fermentation parameters and methane production in rumen fluid from steers given high concentrate diets. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 197: 85-91.
29. Singleton, V.L., Orthofer, R and R.M. Lamuela-Raventos. 1999. Analysis of total phenols and other oxidation substrates and antioxidants by means of folin-ciocalteu reagent. Meth. Enzymol. 299: 152-178.
30. Yıldız, B., Öztürk, Y.E., Kardeş, Y.M., Mut, H and E. Gülümser. 2021. Determination of antioxidant properties and condensed tannin content of mistletoe used as roughage. Anadolu J Agr Sci. 36: 132-137.
31. Zadoks, J.C., Chang, T.T and C.F. Konzak. 1974. A decimal code for growth stages cereals. Weed Res. 14: 415-421.
32. Zeybek, S. 2017. Determination of forage yield and quality of forage rape sown as mixture with some other cool season annual forage crops. MSc thesis, Department of Field Crops, Graduate School of Sciences, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversity, 45s s (in Turkish).