Changes in Yield, Quality, and Nutrient Content According to Different Cutting Times of Meadows

Öz

This study was conducted in 2023 and 2024 to reveal the differences in yield, quality, and nutrient content of meadows in Bingöl province (Türkiye) semi-arid ecological conditions according to different cutting times. In the study, meadows were harvested at 15-day intervals starting in May and four cuttings were performed. Yield characteristics included green forage yield and dry matter yield; quality characteristics included crude protein content, crude protein yield, acid detergent fiber (ADF), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), digestible dry matter (DDM), and relative feed value (RFV); and nutrient elements included phosphorus (P), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), and magnesium (Mg) were examined. The second and third cutting times were superior in terms of dry matter yield and crude protein yield, and the first cutting time had the highest values for crude protein, ADF, NDF, DDM, RFV, P and K contents. No statistically significant differences were detected between cutting times in terms of Ca and Mg contents. It was observed that the ground water was high in the first and second cutting times and the possibility of machine harvesting was very low in the meadow areas examined. Therefore, although the first and second cutting times gave high values in terms of quality characteristics, it is not recommended to harvest at these times. In addition, since meadow areas are generally used for dry matter production, it was concluded that the third cutting time, when dry matter yield and crude protein yield are high, should be preferred instead of the first cutting time when quality characteristics are high. Accordingly, it has been concluded that harvesting meadow areas in early June is more advantageous in semi-arid transition zones and regions with similar ecological conditions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Meadow
• Harvest
• Mowing
• Cutting
• Yield
• Quality

Etik Beyan

There is no need to obtain permission from the ethics committee for this study.

Çayırların Farklı Biçim Zamanlarına Göre Verim, Kalite ve Besin Elementi İçeriklerinin Değişimi

Öz

Bu çalışma, Bingöl ili (Türkiye) yarı-kurak ekolojik koşullarında, farklı biçim zamanlarına göre çayırların verim, kalite ve besin elementleri içerikleri açısından gösterdiği farklılıkları ortaya koymak amacıyla 2023 ve 2024 yıllarında yürütülmüştür. Araştırmada mayıs ayından başlamak üzere 15 günlük aralıklar ile 4 biçim zamanı olacak şekilde çayır alanlarında hasat yapılmıştır. Verim özelliklerinden yeşil ot verimi ve kuru ot verimi, kalite özelliklerinden ham protein oranı, ham protein verimi, asit deterjanda çözünmeyen lif (ADF), nötr deterjanda çözünmeyen lif (NDF), sindirilebilir kuru madde (SKM) ve nispi yem değeri (NYD), besin elementlerinden de fosfor (P), potasyum (K), kalsiyum (Ca) ve magnezyum (Mg) içerikleri incelenmiştir. Kuru ot verimi ve ham protein verimi açısından ikinci ve üçüncü biçim zamanları, ham protein, ADF, NDF, SKM, NYD, P ve K içerikleri açısından ise birinci biçim zamanları ön plana çıkmıştır. Ca ve Mg oranları açısından biçim zamanları arasında istatistiksel olarak herhangi bir farklılık tespit edilmemiştir. İncelenen çayır alanlarında birinci ve ikinci biçim zamanlarında taban suyunun yüksek olduğu ve makineli hasat yapma imkanının oldukça düşük olduğu görülmüştür. Bu nedenle her ne kadar birinci ve ikinci biçim zamanları, kalite özellikleri açısından yüksek değerler vermiş olsa da bu zamanlarında hasat yapılması tavsiye edilmemektedir. Ayrıca genel olarak çayır alanları kuru ot elde etmek için değerlendirilen alanlar olduğundan, kalite özelliklerinin yüksek olduğu birinci biçim zamanı yerine, kuru ot verimi ile ham protein veriminin yüksek olduğu üçüncü biçim zamanının tercih edilmesi gerektiği kanaatine varılmıştır. Dolayısıyla yarı kurak geçiş bölgelerinde ve benzeri ekolojik koşullara sahip bölgelerde, çayır alanlarında hasat işleminin haziran ayının başında yapılmasının daha avantajlı olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çayır
• Hasat
• Biçim
• Kesim
• Verim
• Kalite

Etik Beyan

There is no need to obtain permission from the ethics committee for this study.

Kaynakça

1. Akdeniz, H. (2022). Floristic investigation of the plateau meadows of Trabzon-Düzköy district. Journal of Agriculture, 5(2): 34-49. (In Turkish) https://doi.org/10.46876/ja.1137767
2. Arslan, C. and Eşsiz, D. (2009). Establishing the optimum cutting date and additives for pasture grass silage and its mycotoxin levels. Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kafkas University, 15(4): 531-538.
3. Arslan, C. and Tufan, T. (2011). Determination of herbage yield, nutrient composition and optimum harvesting date of pastures in Kars district. Atatürk University Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 6(2): 131-138. (In Turkish)
4. Artan, H. and Polat, T. (2019). Determining forage quality values in sole and mixtures sowings of some warm season perennial grasses species with alfalfa in the irrigated conditions of Şanlıurfa. Harran University Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, 8(1): 85-92. (In Turkish) https://doi.org/10.31196/huvfd.592576
5. Atalay, A. İ., Tosun, R. and Kaya, A. (2023). Effect of solid-state fermentation on meadow grass nutrient content and anti-methanogenic properties. International Journal of Agriculture and Wildlife Science, 9(2): 278-288. (In Turkish) https://doi.org/10.24180/ijaws.1242317
6. Balkan, H. and Çaçan, E. (2025). Investigation of meadow areas of Kılçadır village (Center Bingöl) in terms of forage yield and some quality characteristics. Bilecik Seyh Edebali University Journal of Science, 12(1): 60-69. (In Turkish) https://doi.org/10.35193/bseufbd.1433884
7. Boob, M., Elsaesser, M., Thumm, U., Hartung, J. and Lewandowski, I. (2019). Harvest time determines quality and usability of biomass from lowland hay meadows. Agriculture, 9(9): 198. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture9090198
8. Cacan, E., Ozdemir, S., Kokten, K., Ucar, R., Mokhtarzadeh, S., Ekmekci, M. and Kutlu, M. A. (2024). Change of forage yield and quality characteristics of white clover (Trifolium repens L.) at different harvest time. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 21(5): 1099-1111. https://doi.org/10.33462/jotaf.1349101

9. Çaçan, E., Aydın, A. and Başbağ, M. (2014). Comparison of yields and qualities of two different protected and non-protected natural areas. Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences, Special Issue(1): 919-926. (In Turkish)
10. Doğan, A. (2011). The yield potential of various time mowing in the natural meadow vegetation of Kırklareli Province, Pehlivanköy District, Yeşilpınar Village and its impact on some nutrient elements. (MSc. Thesis). Namık Kemal University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Tekirdağ, Turkey. (In Turkish)
11. Ekiz, H., Altınok, S., Sancak, C., Sevimay, C. S. and Kendir, H. (2011). Forage Crops, Meadow and Pasture. Ankara University Faculty of Agriculture Publications, Publication No. 1588, Ankara, Türkiye. (In Turkish)
12. Ergül, M. (2008). Feed Science. Ege University Faculty of Agriculture Publications, Publication No. 487, İzmir, Türkiye. (In Turkish)
13. Gökkuş, A., Koç, A. and Çomaklı, B. (2009). Meadow and Pasture Management Guide. Atatürk University Faculty of Agriculture Publications, Publication No. 142, Erzurum, Türkiye. (In Turkish)
14. Güllap, M. K., Erkovan, H. İ., Daşçı, M., Koç, A. and Alatürk, F. (2009). Effects of Phosphorus and Phosphorus Solubilizing Bacteria (Bacillus megaterium var. phosphaticum) Application on Yield and Botanical Composition of Meadow. Türkiye Field Crops Congress, 19-22 October, Hatay, Türkiye. (In Turkish)
15. JMP. (2018). A business unit of SAS (Version 14.0). [Computer software]. SAS Institute, U. S. A.
16. Kara, A., Çakal, Ş., Tavlaş, A., Yazıcı, A., Aygün, C. and Avağ, A. (2009). Customs and problems in exploiting meadow and pastures in North-East Anatolia. Alinteri Journal of Agriculture Science, 16(1): 7-18. (In Turkish)
17. Kaya, İ., Öncüer, A. and Yıldız, S. (2003). Nutrient contents and rumen degradation characteristics of grass hay in Kars district. Eurasian Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 19(1-2): 33-38. (In Turkish)
18. Menteşe, Ö., Turgut, L., Güler, O., Yanar, M., Tüzemen, N., Tan, M. and Çomaklı, B. (2006). Growth performance characteristics of Holstein Friesian calves fed early and late cut meadow hay. Atatürk University Journal of Agricultural Faculty, 37(1): 49-52.
19. Meserszmit, M., Chrabąszcz, M., Chylińska, M., Szymańska-Chargot, M., Trojanowska-Olichwer, A. and Kącki, Z. (2019). The effect of harvest date and the chemical characteristics of biomass from Molinia meadows on methane yield. Biomass and Bioenergy, 130: 105391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.105391
20. MGM (2025). Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change, General Directorate of Meteorology. http://www.mgm.gov.tr (Accessed Date: 03.03.2025)
21. Morrison, J. A. (2003). Hay and Pasture Management, Chapter 8. http://iah.aces.uiuc.edu/pdf/AgronomyHB/08chapter.pdf (Accessed Date: 03.03.2025)
22. Muller, L.D. (2023). Dietary Minerals for Dairy Cows on Pasture. https://extension.psu.edu/dietary-minerals-for-dairy-cows-on-pasture (Accessed Date: 05.03.2025)
23. Rohweder, D. A., Barnes, R. F. and Jorgensen, N. (1978). Proposed hay grading standards based on laboratory analyses for evaluating quality. Journal of Animal Science, 47(3): 747-759. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1978.473747x
24. Sezen, Y. (1995). Fertilizers and Fertilization. Atatürk University Faculty of Agriculture Publications, Publication No. 679, Erzurum, Türkiye. (In Turkish)
25. Sürmen, M. and Kara, E. (2018). Yield and quality characteristics of rangelands which have different slopes in Aydın ecological conditions. Derim, 35(1): 67-72. (In Turkish) https://doi.org/10.16882/derim.2018.343428
26. Töngel, M. Ö. and Ayan, İ. (2005). Some detrimental plants growing in rangeland and meadows of Samsun province and their effects on livestock. The Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Ondokuz Mayıs University, 20(1): 84-93. (In Turkish)
27. Tükel, T. and Hatipoğlu, R. (2005). Meadow-Pasture Management. Çukurova University General Publication No. 191, Adana, Türkiye. (In Turkish)
28. Wróbel, B., Zielewicz, W. and Paszkiewicz-Jasińska, A. (2025). Improving forage quality from permanent grasslands to enhance ruminant productivity. Agriculture, 15(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15131438 Wróbel, B., Zielewicz, W., Paszkiewicz-Jasińska, A., Spychalski, B. and Jakubowska, Z. (2022). Effect of harvest date on structural carbohydrates and lignin content in meadow sward in different pluvio-thermal conditions. Journal of Water and Land Development, 55(X-XII): 60-66. https://doi.org/10.24425/jwld.2022.142305
29. Yavuz, T. and Karadağ, Y. (2016). Yield and quality performances of artificial pasture mixtures under dryland conditions. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, 6(4): 155-163. (In Turkish) https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.2016624167
30. Yıldız, A. and Özyazıcı, M. A. (2017). Determination of hay yield, quality and botanical composition of different rangeland sites under continental climate zone. Turkish Journal of Agricultural Research, 4(3): 218-231. (In Turkish)
31. Yildiz, M. and Cacan, E. (2023). Determination of botanical composition, yield, capacity and condition of lowland pastures in eastern Anatolian region of Turkey. Range Management and Agroforestry, 44(2): 217-225. https://doi.org/10.59515/rma.2023.v44.i2.01
32. Zengin, M. (2012). Fundamental Principles for the Interpretation of Soil and Plant Analysis Results (Chapter 12). In: Plant Nutrition, Eds: Karaman, M.R., Gübretaş Guidebook Series 2, pp. 837-961, Ankara, Türkiye. (In Turkish)