Çukurova koşullarında farklı su düzeylerinin tatlı sorgumun biyokütle verimine ve yem kalitesine etkileri

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 37 Sayı: 1, 86 - 94, 01.06.2020

Muammer Dündar Celal Yücel , Mustafa Ünlü , Aylin Oluk

https://doi.org/10.16882/derim.2020.689049

Cited By: 2

Öz

Araştırma, Çukurova koşullarında farklı su düzeylerinin tatlı sorgumun biyokütle verimine ve yem kalitesine etkilerini saptamak amacıyla yürütülmüştür. Araştırmada M8-E tatlı sorgum çeşidi materyal olarak kullanılmıştır. Araştırma, Çukurova Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Tarımsal Yapılar ve Sulama Bölümü deneme alanında 2017 yılında 2. ürün koşullarında (Haziran-Ekim), tesadüf blokları deneme desenine göre 3 tekrarlamalı olarak yürütülmüştür. Araştırmada, bitki gelişim dönemleri boyunca farklı sulama suyu düzeyleri (I1, I2, I3, I4) uygulanmıştır. Araştırmada, deneme konularına 479.6 mm ile 227.8 mm arasında sulama suyu uygulanmıştır. Hasat, salkımdaki tanelerin süt-hamur olum arası dönemde yapılmıştır. Biyokütle veriminin saptanmasının yanı sıra hasat edilen bitkiler ile silaj yapılmış olup silaj kalite özellikleri de saptanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda biyomas (hasıl) veriminin sulama düzeylerine göre 13300 ile 8733 kg arasında değiştiği ve en yüksek verimin I1 ve en düşük verimin ise I4 sulama düzeylerinde saptanmıştır. Ayrıca su düzeylerinin yapılan silajların kalite özelliklerinde nötral deterjan lif (NDF), ham protein (HP) oranı, ham kül (HK), kuru madde tüketimi (KMT) ve nispi yem değeri (NYD) üzerine istatistiki olarak önemli etkide bulunduğu saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tatlı sorgum, su düzeyleri, verim

Kaynakça

• Abdel-Motagally, F.M.F. (2010). Evaluation of water use efficiency under different water regimes in grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor(L.) Moench). World Journal Agricultural Science, 6:499-505.
• Almodares, A., Hotjatabdy, R.H., & Mirniam, E. (2013). Effect of drought stres on biomass and carbohydrate contents of two sweet sorghum cultivars. Journal of Environmental Biology, 34, 585-589.
• Aman, P. (1993). Composition and structure of cell wall polysaccharides in forages. In: Jung HG, Buxton DR, Hatfield RD, Ralph J. (Eds.), Forage Cell Wall Structure and Digestibility. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI, pp. 183-199.
• AOAC. 1990. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official method of analysis. 15th ed. Washington, DC. USA, 66-88.
• Asay, K.H., Jensen, K.B., Waldron, B.L., Han, G., & Monaco, T.A. (2002). Forage quality of tall fescuea cross an irrigation gradient. Agronomy Journal, 94, 1337-1343. doi:10.2134/agronj2002.1337.
• Caravetta, G.J., Cherney, J.H., & Johnson, K.D. (1990). Within-row spacing influences on diverse sorghum genotypes. 2. Dry matter yield and forage quality. Agronomy Journal, 82, 210-215.
• Cattani, M., Guzzo, N., Mantovani, R., & Bailoni, L. (2017). Effects of total replacement of corn silage with sorghum silage on milk yield, composition, and quality. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 8:15. DOI 10.1186/s40104-017-0146-8. Chakravarthi, M.K., Reddy, Y.R., Rao, K.S., Ravi, A., Punyakumari, B., & Ekambaram B. (2017). A study on nutritive value and chemical composition of sorghum fodder”, International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology, 6 (1), 104-109.
• Dweikat, I. (2014). Sorghum Diversity Paper, Sweet Energy Crop Article”. http://agronomy.unl.edu/sweetsorghum. 7 Temmuz 2014.
• FAO, Food and Agricultural Organization, (2011). Grassland Index. A searchable catalogue of grass and forage legumes. FAO.
• Gomes, S.O., Pitombeira, J.B., Neiva, J.N.M., & Candidado, M.J.D. (2006). Agronomic behavior and forage composition of sorghum cultivars in the State of Ceará. Revista Ciência Agronômica, 37(2),221-227.
• Habyarimana, E., Laureti, D., Ninno, M.D., & Lorenzomi, C. (2004). Performances of biomass sorghum [Sorghum bicolor(L.) Moench] under different water regimes in Mediterranean region. Indian Crop Production, 20, 23-28.
• Hatfield, R.D. (1993). Cell wall polysaccharide interactions and digestibility. In: Jung HG, Buxton DR, Hatfield RD, Ralph J. (Eds.), Forage Cell wall Structure and Digestibility. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI, pp. 285-313.
• Iyanar, K., Vijayakumar G., & Fazllullah Khan A.K. 2010. Correlation and path analysis in multicut fodder sorghum. Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding, 1(4), 1006-1009.
• Jahanzad, E., Jorat, M., Moghadam, H., Sadeghpour, A., Chaichi, M.R., & Dashtaki, M. (2013). Response of a new and a commonly grown forage sorghum cultivar to limited irrigation and planting density. Agricultural Water Management, 117, 62-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.11.001.
• Junior, M.A.P.O., Retore, M., Manarelli, D.M., de Souza, F.B., Ledesma, L.L.M., & Orrico A.C.A. (2015). Forage potential and silage quality of four varieties of saccharine sorghum, Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira, Brasília, 50 (12), 1201-1207.
• Kaiser, A.G., Plitz J.W., Burns H.M., & Griffiths N.W. (2004). Successful Silage. Dairy Australia NSW Department of Primary Industries, 468p.
• Kanber, R. (1984). Çukurova koşullarında açık su yüzeyi buharlaşmasından (Class A Pan) yararlanarak birinci ve ikinci ürün yerfıstığının sulanması. Bölge Topraksu Araştırma Enstitüsü Yayınları, 114 (64), Tarsus.
• Kanber, R.., & Güngör, H. (1986). Açık su yüzeyi (Class A Pan) buharlaşmasının sulama programlarının oluşturulmasında kullanılması. Köy Hizmetleri Araştırma Ana Projesi. 5 Nolu Ek Talimat. Bitki su Tüketiminin saptanması Ana Projesi No:433, Eskişehir, 1 s.
• Kaplan, M., Kara, K., Unlukara, A., Kale, H., Buyukkilic, S.B., Varol, I.S., Kizilsimsek, M., & Kamalak, A. (2019). Water deficit and nitrogen affects yield and feed value of sorghum sudangrass silage. Agricultural Water Management, 218, 30-36.
• Karthikeyan, B.J., Babu, C., & Amalraj, J.J. (2017). Nutritive value and fodder potential of different sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) cultivars. International Journal of Current Microbiology Applied Science, 6(8), 898-911. Machado, L.C., Ferreira, W.M., & Scpinello, C. (2012). Apparent digestibility of simplified and semi-simplified diets, with and without addition of enzymes, and nutritional value of fibrous sources for rabbits. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 41,1662-70.
• Mastrorilli, M., Katerji, N., & Rana, G. (1999). Productivity and water use efficiency of sweet sorghum as affected by soil water deficit occurring at different vegetative growth stages. European Journal of Agronomy, 11, 207-215.
• McKinley, B. A., Olson, S. N., Ritter, K. B., Herb, D. W., Karlen, S. D., Lu, F., & Mullet, J. E. (2018). Variation in energy sorghum hybrid TX08001 biomass composition and lignin chemistry during development under irrigated and non irrigated field conditions. PLoS One, 13(4), e0195863. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195863.
• Munamava, M., & Riddoch, I. (2001) Responses of three sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) varieties to soil moisture stress at different developmental stages. South African Journal Plant Soil, 18:75-79.
• Neto, A.B., Pereira dos Reis R.H., Cabral L.da S., Abreu J G., Sousa D.P., Sousa F.G. 2017. Nutritional value of sorghum silage of different purposes. Ciência e Agrotecnologia, 41(3), 288-299,
• Newman, M.A. (2014). Defining the energy and nutrient content of corn grown in drought-stressed conditions and determining the relationship between energy content of corn and the response of growing pigs to xylanase supplementation. MSc thesis submitted to the Iowa State University, Pp 5-25. Özbek, H., Dinç, U., & Kapur, S. (1974). Çukurova Üniversitesi Yerleşim Sahası Topraklarının Detaylı Etüd ve Haritası. Ç.Ü. Ziraat Fakültesi Yayın No: 23, Bilimsel Araştırma ve İncelemeler 8, Adana, 149 s.
• Perrier, L., Rouan, L., Jaffuel, S., Clément Vidal, A., Roques, S., Soutiras, A., & Luquet, D. (2017). Plasticity of sorghum stem biomass accumulation in response to water deficit: A multiscale analysis from internode tissue to plant level. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8(1516). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01516.
• Reddy, B., Kumar, A., & Ramesh, S. (2007). Sweet sorghum: a water saving bioenergy crop. ICRISAT, International Conference on Linkages Between Energy and Water Management for Agriculture in Developing Countries, January 29-30, 2007, IWMI, ICRISAT Campus, Hyderabad, India.
• Rodrigues, F.O., França A.F. de S., Oliveira R.de P., Oliveria, E.R. de., Rosa, B., Soares, T.V., & Mello, S.Q.S. (2006). Produção e composição bromatológica de quatro híbridos de sorgo forrageiro (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) submetidos atrês doses de nitrogênio. Ciência Animal Brasileira, 7, 37-48.
• Sasani, S., Jahansooz, M.R., & Ahmadi, A. (2004). The effects of deficit irrigation on water-use efficiency, yield, and quality of forage pearl millet. Proceedings of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane, Australia, 26 Sep-1 Oct.
• Schroeder, J.W. (1994). Interpreting forage Analysis. Extention Dairy specialist (NDSU). AS-1080, North Dakota State University.
• Seif, F., Paknejad, F., Azizi, F., Kashani, A., & Shahabifar, M. (2016). Effect of different irrigation regimes and zeolite application on yıeld and quality of silage corn hybrids. Journal of Experimental Biology and Agricultural Sciences, 4 (VIS). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18006/2016.4(VIS).721.729.
• Silva, M. A., Jifon J.L., Da Silva, J.A.G., & Sharma, V. (2007). Use of physiological parameters as fast tools to screen for drought tolerance in sugarcane. Brazilian Journal of Plant Physiology, 19,193-201.
• Subramanian, S.K. (2013). Agronomical, physiological and biochemical approaches to characterize sweet sorghum genotypes for biofuel production”. M.S.,Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, India, 2003. An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Doctor of Philosophy. Department of Agronomy College of Agriculture. Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas.
• Tahir, G. M., Ul-Haq, A., Khaliq, T., Rehman, M., & Hussain, S. (2014). Effect of different irrigation levels on yield and forage quality of oat (A. sativa L.). Applied Science Report, 7 (1), 42-46.
• Tingting, X., Peixi S.U., Lishan S. (2010). Photosynthetic characteristics and water use efficiency of sweet sorghum under different watering regimes. Pakistan Journal of Botany. 42, 3981-3994.
• Trulea, A., Vintila, T., Pop, G., Sumalan, R., Gaspar, S. (2013). Ensiling sweet sorghum and maize stalks as feedstock for renewable energy production. Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 45, 193-199.
• Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.D., & Lewis, B.A. (1991). Methods for dietary fibre, neutral detergent fibre and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science,74, 3583-3597.
• Yavuz, M.Y. (1993). Farklı sulama yöntemlerinin pamukta verim ve su kullanımına etkileri. Ç.Ü. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Tarımsal Yapılar ve Sulama ABD, Doktora Tezi, Adana.
• Yücel, C., Hatipoğlu, R., Dweikat, I., İnal, İ., Gündel, F., & Yücel, H. ve ark. (2018). Farklı tatlı sorgum (Sorghum bicolor var. saccharatum (L.) Mohlenbr.) genotiplerinin Çukurova ve GAP bölgelerinde biyo-etanol üretim potansiyellerinin saptanması. Tübitak 1003, 114O945 nolu Proje Sonuç Raporu, 298 s.
• Yucel, C. & Erkan, M.E. (2020). Evaluation of forage yield and silage quality of sweet sorghum in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Journal of Animal and Plant Science (accepted to publishing, August-2020).
• Zerbini, E., & Thomas, D. (2003). Opportunities for improvement of nutritive value in sorghum and pearl millet residues in south Asia through genetic enhancement. Field Crops Research, 84, 3-15.