Farklı Sıra Aralığının Kinoa Silajının Besin Değerine Etkisi

Year 2024, Volume: 11 Issue: 2, 371 - 380, 30.04.2024

Bilal Keskin , Abdurrahman Duman

https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.1421114

Abstract

Dünyadaki iklim değişiklikleri kurak alanların ve tuzlu toprakların artmasına neden olmakta, aynı zamanda aşırı iklim ve toprak koşullarının artması da arazi kullanım verimliliğini kısıtlamaktadır. Bu alanlarda hayvanlara silaj yemi sağlamak zorlaşmaktadır. Bu nedenle alternatif yem bitkisi arayışları da artıyor. Kurak, soğuk ve tuzlu topraklara dayanıklı olan kinoa (Chenepodium quinoa Willd.) bitkisi, ekstrem iklim ve toprak koşullarında silaj üretimi için önemli bir alternatif bitki potansiyeline sahiptir. Bu amaçla 4 farklı sıra arası mesafede (17.5, 35.0, 52.5, 70.0 cm) yetiştirilen 2 kinoa çeşidinin (Cherry Vanilya ve Red Head) silaj besin değerleri üzerine bir araştırma yapılmıştır. Araştırmada hayvanlar için önemli besin değerlerini olan ham kül içeriği (HK), ham protein (HP), asit deterjan lifi (ADF), nötr deterjan lifi (NDF), kuru madde sindirilebilirliği (KMS), kuru madde tüketimi (KMT) ve nispi yem değeri (NYD)’nin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda tohumların farklı sıra aralıklarına ekilmesinin kinoa silajında HP, NDF, KMT ve NYD üzerine önemli etkisinin olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Kinoa silajının besin değerleri açısından çeşitler arasında (HP hariç) önemli bir farklılık görülmemiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre geniş sıra aralığı ile yapılan ekimlerin kinoa silajının besin değerini arttırdığı tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

Kinoa, ham protein, ham kül, silaj, nispi yem değeri

Supporting Institution

Iğdır Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Birimi

Project Number

2020-FBE-A04

Thanks

Financial support was provided to the research by Iğdır University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit with the project number 2020-FBE-A04.

Effects of Different Row Spacing on the Nutritional Value of Quinoa Silage

Abstract

Climate changes in the world cause an increase in arid areas and saline soils, and at the same time, the increase in extreme climate and soil conditions restricts land use efficiency. In these areas, it becomes difficult to provide silage feed for animals. Therefore, the search for alternative forage plants is also increasing. Quinoa (Chenepodium quinoa Willd.) plant, which is resistant to arid, cold and salty soils, has an important alternative plant potential for silage production in extreme climate and soil conditions. For this purpose, a research was conducted on the silage nutrition values of 2 quinoa varieties (Cherry Vanilla and Read Head) grown at 4 different row spacing distances (17.5, 35.0, 52.5, 70.0 cm). In the research, It is aimed to determine crude ash content (CA), crude protein (CP), acid detergent fiber (ADF), neutral detergent fiber (NDF), dry matter digestibility (DMD), dry matter consumption (DMI) and relative feed value (RFV), which have important nutritional values for animals. As a result of the research, it was determined that sowing seeds at different row spacings had a significant effect on CP, NDF, DMI and RFV of quinoa silage. There was no significant difference in the nutritional values of quinoa silage between varieties (except CP). According to the results of the research, it was determined that sowing with wide row spacing increased the nutritional value of quinoa silage.

Keywords

Quinoa, crude protein, crude ash, silage, relative feed value

Project Number

2020-FBE-A04

References

• AOAC, (2003). Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 17th ed., 2 nd Rev., Gaithersburg, MD, USA, Association of Analytical Communities.
• AOAC, (1990). Official methods of analysis association of official analytical chemists.125 p. Arlington, VA, USA
• Çağlayan, B., Kökten, K. (2021). Adaptation of Kinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) Genotypes in Bingol Conditions. Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture, 16(2): 220-225.
• Dong, Z., Li, J., Wang, S., Zhao, J., Dong, D., Shao, T., (2022). Influence of Various Additives On The Fermentation Quality And Bacterial Community of High-Moisture Whole-Plant Quinoa Silage. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1231549/v1.
• Erdoğan, H., Koca, Y. O. (2020). Effect of Quinoa-Corn Intercropping Production System on Yield and Quality of Mixture Silage. Turkish Journal of Range and Forage Science (TJRFS), 1(2): 57-65.
• Erekul, O., Yiğit, A., Koca, Y.O., & Ellmer, F., Weiß, K., (2016). Quality Potantials and Importance in Terms of Nutrition Physiology of Some Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Varieties. Journal of Field Crops Central Research Institute, 25(özel sayı 1): 31-36. https://doi.org/10.21566/tarbitderg.280110.
• FAO, 1990. Micronutrient assessment at the country level: An international study, FAO Soil Bulletin, No: 63, Rome.
• Geerts, S., Raes, D., Garcia, M., Taboada, C., Miranda, R., Cusicanqui, J., Mhizhac, T., Vacher, J., (2009). Modeling the potential for closing quinoa yield gaps under varying water availability in the Bolivian Altiplano. Agricultural Water Management, 96(11): 1652-1658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2009.06.020.
• Güner, Z., Temel, S. (2022). Determination of the Silage Quality of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) Varieties Grown with Different Row Spacing Under Dry Conditions. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, 12(4): 2506-2519. https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.1175686.
• Jacobsen, S. E. (2003). The worldwide potential for quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Food Reviews International, 19(1–2): 167-177. https://doi.org/10.1081/FRI-120018883.
• Keskin, B., Temel, S., Tohumcu, S. A. 2023. Determination of forage yield performance of different Chenopodium quinoa cultivars in saline conditions. Zemdirbyste-Agriculture, 110(2): 149-156. https://doi.org/10.13080/z-a.2023.110.018.
• Koca, Y. O., Canavar, Ö., (2014). The Effect of Sowing Date on Yield and Yield Components and Seed Quality of Corn (Zea mays L.). Scientific Papers, Series A. Agronomy, 57: 227-231.
• Koca, Y.O., Turgut, İ. (2012). The Effect of Different Sowing date for Grain Yield, Dry Matter Accumulation, Leaf Area Index and Some Growth Parameters in Maize (Zea mays L.). Journal of Adnan Menderes University Agricultural Faculty, 9(1): 1-10.
• MGM, (2021). Başbakanlık DMİ Genel Müdürlüğü Ankara.
• Moore, J. E., Undersander, D. J. (2002). Relative Forage Quality: Alternative to Relative Feed Value and Quality Index. Proceedings 13th Annual Florida Ruminant Nutrition Symposium, pp.16 -32.
• Moore, K. J., Jung, H. J. G., (2001). Lignin And Fiber Digestion. Journal of Range Management, 54(4): 420-430. https://doi.org/10.2307/4003113.
• Norton, B.W., (2012). The Nutritive value of Tree legumes. http://www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPC/doc/Pub icat/Gutt-shel/x5556e0j.htm. pp. 1-10. (Erişim: 07.11.2012).
• Önkür, H., Keskin, B. (2019a). The Effects of Row Spacing and Intra-Row Spacing Distance on Seed Yield and Some Plant Properties of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Journal of Agriculture and Nature, 22((Suppl 1): 51-59. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.536580.
• Önkür, H., Keskin, B. (2019b). The Effect of Different Row Spacing and Intra-Row Spacing on Some Feed Quality Characteristics of Seeds and Stems of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Umteb 6th International Vocational and Technical Sciences Congress (Turkish: Umteb 6. Uluslararası Mesleki ve Teknik Bilimler Kongresi), 11-12 April 2019 Iğdır-Türkiye, İksad Publications, ISBN – 978-605-7875-36-5, pp: 271-278.
• Podkòwka, Z., Gesiński, K., Podkòwka, L. (2018). The İnfluence of Additives Facilitating Ensiling on the Quality of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) Silage. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 19(3): 607-614. https://doi.org/10.5513/JCEA01/19.3.2237.
• Pulvento, C., Riccardi, M., Lavini, A., Iafelice, G., Marconi, E., d’Andria, R. 2012. Yield and Quality Characteristics of Quinoa Grown in Open Field Under Different Saline and Non-Saline Irrigation Regimes. Journal Agronomy and Crop Science, 198(4): 254-263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.2012.00509.x.
• Razzaghi, F. (2011). Acclimatization and Agronomic Performance of Quinoa Exposed to Salinity, Drought and Soil-Related Abiotic Stresses. Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Agroecology Science and Technology. Aarhus University. pp:1-124.
• Rezzouk F. Z., Shahid M. A., Elouafi I. A., Zhou B., Araus J. L., Serret M. D. 2020. Agronomic performance of irrigated quinoa in desert areas: Comparing different approaches for early assessment of salinity stress. Agricultural Water Management, 240: 106205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106205
• Richards L. A. 1954. Origin and natüre of saline and alkali soil, In: Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soil. Agricultural Handbook No: 60, USDA, Washington, D.C., USA, 1-6.
• Rivera, D., Parish, J., (2010). Interpreting Forage and Feed Analysis Reports. 2620, Mississippi State University Extension Service, Publicaiton 2620.
• Rohweder, D. A., Barnes, R.F., 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.
• Salama, R., Yacout, M. H., Elgzar, M. I. T., Awad, A. A. (2021). Nutritional Evaluation of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd) Crop as Unconventional Forage Resource in Feeding Ruminants. Egyptian Journal of Nutrition and Feeds, 24(1): 77-84. https://doi.org/10.21608/EJNF.2021.170306.
• Schooten, H. V. and Pinxterhuis, I. (2003). Quinoa as an Alternative Forage Crop in Organic Dairy Farming. 12th EGF Symposium on “Optimal forage systems for animal production and the environment” Grassland Science in Europe, volume 8, pp. 656.
• Sheaffer, C. C., Peterson, M. A., Mccaslin, M., Volenec, J. J., Cherney, J. H., Johnson, K. D., Woodward, W. T., & Viands, D. R. (1995). Acid Detergent Fiber, Neutral Detergent Fiber Concentration and Relative Feed Value. In North American Alfalfa Improvement Conference, Minneapolis.
• Suárez, N. J. P., Escobar, M. I., Molano, C. E. R. (2019). Nutritional Value of Quinoa Forage Silage (Chenopodium quinoa willd) with the Addition of Efficient Microorganisms. Revista CES Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, 14(3): 16-28.
• Tan, M., Temel, S., (2017). Studies on the adaptation of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) to Eastern Anatolia Region of Turkey. AGROFOR International Journal, 2(2): 33-39.
• Tan, M., Temel, S., (2019). Her Yönüyle Kinoa Önemi, Kullanılması ve Yetiştiriciliği. Iksad Publishing House, ISBN: 978-605-7875-88-4.
• Temel, S., Keskin, B., (2022). Determination Of Forage Quality Properties of Plant Parts in Different Amaranth Varieties Cultivated under Irrigated and Rainfed Conditions. Atatürk University Journal of Agricultural Faculty, 53(2): 122-132. https://doi.org/10.54614/AUAF.2022.1034402.
• Temel, I., Keskin, B. (2019a). The Effects of Different Row Spacing And Intra-Row Spacing On Hay Yield and Some Yield Components of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, 9(1): 522-532. https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.480917.
• Temel, I., Keskin, B. (2019b). The Effects on Nutrient Content of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) of Different Row Spacing and Intra-Row Spacing. International Journal of Agriculture and Wildlife Science, 5(1): 110-116. https://doi.org/10.24180/ijaws.486327.
• Temel, S., Keskin, B., (2020). Effect Of Morphological Components On The Herbage Yield And Quality Of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) Grown At Different Dates. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 44: 533-542. https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-1912-58.
• Temel, S., Şurgun, N., (2019). Farklı Dozlarda Uygulanan Azot ve Fosforlu Gübrelemenin Kinoanın Ot Verimi ve Kalitesine Etkisi. Iğdır Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(3): 1785-1796.
• Temel, S., Tan, M., (2020). Evaluation of Different Quinoa Varieties Grown in Dry Conditions in terms of Roughage Quality Properties. International Journal of Agriculture and Wildlife Science, 6(2): 347-354. https://doi.org/10.24180/ijaws.735557.
• Temel, S., Yolcu, S. (2020). The Effect of Different Sowing Time and Harvesting Stages on the Herbage Yield and Quality of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 25(1): 41-49, Doi: 10.17557/tjfc.737503.
• Ülgen N., Yurtsever N. 1974. Turkey fertilizer and fertilization guide (Türkiye gübre ve gübreleme rehberi). Soil and Fertilizer Research Institute Technical Publication No:28, Ankara.
• 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. Journal of Dairy Science, 74(10): 3583-3597. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2.
• Yacout, M. H., Salama, R., Elgzar, M., Awad, A. A., (2021). In Vivo and in Vitro Studies to Evaluate Nutritional Value of Chenopodium quinoa as Unconventional Forage Resource for Feeding Ruminants. Archives of Agricultural Sciences Journal, 4(2): 135-149. https://doi.org/10.21608/AASJ.2021.212502.