Kırşehir Ekolojik Koşullarında Bazı Silajlık Sorgum ile Sorgum-Sudanotu Melez Çeşitlerinin Verim ve Kalite Özelliklerinin Belirlenmesi

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 3, 388 - 395, 23.07.2019

Hakan Kır Başak Dursun Şahan

https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.595170

Cited By: 4

Öz

Bu
araştırma Kırşehir ilinde 2016-2017 yaz yetiştirme sezonunda bazı sorgum ve
sorgum-sudanotu melez çeşitlerinin
verim ve kalite özelliklerini belirlemek amacıyla tek lokasyonda yürütülmüştür.
Bölünmüş parseller deneme desenine göre üç tekerrürlü olarak yürütülen bu
çalışmada, üç sorgum (Gözde 80, Early Sumac, Rox) ve altı sorgum-sudanotu
(Aneto, Greengo, Teide, Sugar Graze, Gardavan, Jumbo) melez çeşidi kullanılmıştır.
Denemeye alınan sorgum ve sorgum-sudanotu melez çeşitleri arasında özellikler
bakımından önemli derecede farklılıkların olduğu belirlenmiştir. İki yıllık
ortalama sonuçlara göre; çeşitlerin kuru madde verimleri 1185.3 (Gözde 80) – 28957.3 (Jumbo) kg ha^-1, ham
protein verimleri 8777.5 (Gözde 80) ve 2799.8 (Jumbo) kg ha^-1 ve sindirilebilir kuru madde verimleri 7396.5 (Gözde 80) ve17908.3 (Jumbo) kg ha^-1. Protein oranı  % 7.3 (Gözde 80) - 10.4 (Aneto), ADF oranı %
30.1 (Rox) - 37.4 (Early Sumac), NDF % 44.6 (Rox)- 57.2 (Early Sumac), ADL % 4.2 (Early Sumac) - 5.6 (Teide ) SKMO % 59.7 (Early Sumac) -
65.5 (Rox) arasında değişmiştir. Kırşehir
ekolojik koşullarında verim ve kalite bakımdan Jumbo
çeşidi ile Greengo çeşidi alternatif bir yem bitkisi olarak
yetiştirilebileceği belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sorgum, verim, kalite, ham protein

Teşekkür

The first-year data of this two-year study was used in the thesis of Başak DURSUN ŞAHAN whom I have been advising

Yield and Quality Feature of Some Silage Sorghum and Sorghum-Sudangrass Hybrid Cultivars in Ecological Conditions of Kırşehir Province

Öz

This
current study was conducted to determine adaption and quality characters of
sorghum and sorghum-sudangrass hybrid during 2016-2017 summer growing seasons
in Kırşehir province. The experimental was a randomized complete block design
with three replications, three sorghum cultivars (Gözde 80, Early Sumac, Rox)
and six sorghum-sudangrass (Aneto, Greengo, Teide, Sugar Graze, Gardavan,
Jumbo) hybrid cultivars. There were significant differences in tested
characters among sorghum
and sorghum-sudangrass hybrid
cultivars. According to average two years; dry matter yield of the cultivars
was between 11855.3 (Gözde 80) and 28957.3 (Jumbo) kg ha^-1, crude
protein yield was between 877.5 (Gözde 80) 
and 2799.8 (Jumbo) kg ha^-1 and digestible dry matter yield
was between 7396.5 (Gözde 80) and 17908.3 (Jumbo) kg ha^-1. Crude
protein ratio ranged from 7.3 (Gözde 80) to 10.4 (Aneto) %, ADF from 30.1 (Rox)
to 37.4 (Early Sumac) %, NDF from 44.6 (Rox) to 57.2 (Early Sumac) %, ADL from
4.2 (Early Sumac) to 5.6 (Teide ) % and digestible dry matter from 59.7 (Early
Sumac) to 65.5 (Rox) %. To conclude; Greengo and Jumbo that had better results
among the studied cultivars, are suggested as alternative forage crops in
Kırşehir ecological condition.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sorghum, yield, quality, crude protein

Kaynakça

• Acar, R., Akbudak, M., Sade, B. 2002. The determination of yield and some yield components of sorghum-sudangrass hybrid cultivars for silage production in Konya ecological conditions. Selcuk University Faculty of Agriculture Journal, 16(29): 88-95.
• Açıkgöz, E. 2001. Yem Bitkileri. Uludağ Üniversitesi, Bursa 2001, 568 p.
• Akdeniz, H., Karslı, A. M., Nursoy, H., Yılmaz, İ. 2003. Determination of the chemical composition and digestible dry matter yields of some grain sorghum varieties. 27(6): 1349-1355.
• Anonymous, 2019. Analytical Methods Fiber Analyzer A200. Retrieved from www.ankom.com/analytical-methods-support/fiber-analyzer-a200.
• AOAC, 2005. Official methods of analysis. association of official analytical chemists (18th), (18th ed.)Association of Official Analytical Chemists International, Maryland, USA.
• Atis, I., Konuskan, O., Duru, M., Gozubenli, H., Yilmaz, S. 2012. Effect of harvesting time on yield, composition and forage quality of some forage sorghum cultivars. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 14(6): 879-886.
• Ayaz, M., Özpinar, H., Yaman, S., Acar, A., Yasemin, A., Yavrutürk, Y., Niksarligil, F., Serhat, A., Aygün, Y. 2013. Analysing yield and quality characteristics of silage maize cultivars which are used commonly or may be use for main crop. Harran Journal of Agricultural, 17(2): 23-35.
• Canbolat, Ö. 2012. Comparison of İnvitro gas production, organic matter digestibility, relative feed value and metabolizable energy contents of some cereal forages. Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kafkas University, 18(4): 571-577.
• Gençoğlan, C., Yazar, A. 1999. The effects of deficit irrigations on corn yield and water use efficiency. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 23: 233-241.
• Geren, H., Avcioğlu, R., Kır, B., Demiroğlu, G., Yılmaz, M.F., Cevheri, A.C. 2003. Effect of different sowing dates on the yield and quality characteristics of some maize cultivars grown as second crop for silage. Ege Journal of Agricultural Research, 40(3): 57-64.
• Geren, H., Kavut, Y.T. 2009. An investigation on comparison of sorghum (Sorghum sp.) species with corn (Zea mays L.) grown under second crop production. Ege Journal of Agricultural Research, 46(1): 9-16.
• Güneş, A., Acar, R. 2005. The determination of growing possibilties of sorghum-sudangrass cultivars as second crop under Karaman ecolojical conditions. Selcuk University Faculty of Agriculture Journal, 19(35): 8-15.
• Horrocks, R.D., Valentine, J.F. 1999. Harvested Forages. Academic Press, 415 p.
• Jung, H.J.G., Vogel, K.P. 1992. Lignification of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) and big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) plant parts during maturation and its effect on fibre degradability. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 59(2): 169-176.
• Kacar, B., Katkat, A.V. 2014. Gübreler ve Gübreleme Tekniği. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım, 574 p.
• Kaplan, M., Kızılşimşek, M. 2012. Determination of nutritional values of different grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) strains and varieties. Erciyes University Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences, 28(1): 11-14.
• Karadağ, Y., Uygur, E. 2013. Determining of adaptation ability of some sorghum cultivar for silage as second crop in Tokat ecological conditions. 10. Field Crops Congress of Turkey, Konya.
• Karadağ, Y., Özkurt, M. 2014. Effect of different row spacings on the yield and quality of silage sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L) Moench) cultivars to be second crop grown. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Gaziosmanpaşa University, 31(1): 19-24.
• Keskin, B., Yılmaz, İ. H. and Akdeniz, H. 2005. Yield and yield component of forage sorghum hybrid (Sorghum bicolor x Sorghum sudanense Stapf.) as influenced by varieties and maturity. Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture, 36(2): 145-150.
• Millner, J. P., Silungwe, D. and McGill, C. R. 2011. Forage quality of sorghum, sudan-grass sorghumxsudangrass and pearl millet cultivars in manawatu. Agronomy New Zealand, 41: 13-22.
• Nazlı, İ., R., İnal, İ., Kuşvuran, A., Sezer, M., C., Tansı, V. 2013. Determinaton of yield and quality properties of some sorghumxsudangrass hybrid cultivars under Cukurova conditions. 10. Field Crops Congress of Turkey, Konya.
• Özköse, A., Mülayim, M., Acar, R. 2015. Effect of row spacing on some yield and yield components of silage sorghum cultivars in Konya conditions. Selcuk University Faculty of Agriculture Journal, 2(1): 10-18.
• Parlak, M., Özaslan, A. 2006. The effect of different irrigation water salinities on silage sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) yield and soil salinity. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 12(1): 8-13.
• Pedersen, J., Gorz, H.J., Haskins, F.A., Ross, W. 1982. Variability for quality and agronomic traits in forage sorghum hybrids. Crop Science, 22:4, 853-856.
• Petersen, R.G. 1994. Agricultural Field Experiments: Design and Analysis. CRC Press, 426, 105 p.
• Pires, D.A. d. A., Moura, M.M.A., Costa, R.F., Rodrigues, J.A.S., Alves, K.A. 2017. Nutritional characteristics of sorghum hybrids hay (Sorghum sudanense vs. Sorghum bicolor). Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences, 39(3): 229-234.
• Pushparajah, S., Sinniah, J. 2018. Evaluation of dry matter yield and nutritive value of sugar graze and Jumbo plus at different spacing in the yala season in the dry zone of Sri Lanka. Pushparajah and Sinniah Agric & Food Secur (2018) 7:22 7(1): 22.
• Salman, A., Budak, B. 2015. A study on yield and yield properties of different varieties of hybrid sorghum x sorghum sudan grass (Sorghum bicolor x Sorghum sudanense Stapf.). Journal of Adnan Menderes University Agricultural Faculty, 12(2): 93-100.
• Siefers, M., Turner, J., Huck, G., Anderson, S., Bolsen, K., Young, M.A., Pope, R.V. 1997. Agronomic and silage quality traits of forage sorghum cultivars in 1995 Kansas Agric. Exp. Sta. Rep. Prog., 783: 75-79.
• Tiryaki, İ. 2005. Sorghum: genetics root, usage, breeding techniques and biotechnological developments. K.S.U Journal of Science and Engineering, 8(1): 84-90.
• Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B., Lewis, B.A. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci, 74(10): 3583-3597.
• Yavuz, M. 2005. Detergent fiber system. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Gaziosmanpaşa University, 2005(1) 93-96.