Tall and short-sized elephant grass genotypes: morphophysiological aspects cut-and-carry, and grazing management

Abstract

Elephant grass (pennisetum purpureum schum.) has been grown only in cut-and-carry systems for a long time. However, interest in its grazing management has been increasing because of the selection of short-sized genotypes, which have gained new relevance since 1988 with the registration of ‘mott’ grass. in this sense, tall and short-sized genotypes present important differences in morphology, quality and productivity; although, environmental factors also exert influence on these aspects. This review aimed to approach how the elephant grass size can influence the morphophysiological characteristics, management decisions, and exploitation of this species. the morphophysiological aspects and the elephant grass sizes are important to direct their utilization in the different production systems. The research results from previous decades suggest that the particularities of the tall-sized genotypes, such as great forage accumulation, high organic reserves content, and stem elongation, favor their management in cut-and-carry systems and industrial sectors. Conversely, the short-sized elephant grass genotypes present aspects as higher leaf proportion in the harvested forage, leaf/stem ratio, and tillering. these factors facilitate their exploitation in grazing systems.

Irrigation effects on elephant grass morphology, and its genotype‐dependent responses

“…The use of irrigation during the dry season is a strategy that can mitigate the effects of this period on the morphological and productive aspects of most of the crops, as reported in highly productive tropical grasses such as sugarcane (Inman‐Bamber et al, 2008), Megathyrsus maximus (Jacq.) (Jesus et al, 2021) and elephant grasses (Silva et al, 2021). The use of irrigation for forage production is generally viable in intensive and productive systems, such as cut‐and‐carry and hay fields, where the production is intensified in smaller areas compared to the typical larger areas of grasslands (Reis et al, 2017).…”

“…( Pennisetum purpureum Schumach.) (Chemisquy et al, 2010), is generally one of the most preferred by tropical farmers when establishing a cut‐and‐carry system (Ferreira et al, 2018; Silva et al, 2021). Elephant grass genotypes produce dry matter yields ranging between 25 and 60 t ha −1 year −1 (Na et al, 2015; Bueno et al, 2020), based on an outstanding water use efficiency (Erickson et al, 2012; Liang et al, 2018), and excellent responses to fertilisation, especially when using N fertilisers (Bueno et al, 2020; Siri‐Prieto et al, 2020).…”

“…Tall‐sized genotypes, have a higher elongation of their internodes, accumulating greater proportions of stems in their biomass, which increase their total production, however, with a negative impact on the nutritional quality of the forage (Freitas et al, 2017; Pereira et al, 2017). On the other hand, the dwarf genotypes, have a lower rate of stem elongation and shorter internodes (Pereira et al, 2017; Silva et al, 2021). The use of elephant grass in cut‐and‐carry systems generally prioritises cultivars with superior growth rates and biomass production, for example, tall‐sized genotypes (Silva et al, 2021).…”

“…On the other hand, the dwarf genotypes, have a lower rate of stem elongation and shorter internodes (Pereira et al, 2017; Silva et al, 2021). The use of elephant grass in cut‐and‐carry systems generally prioritises cultivars with superior growth rates and biomass production, for example, tall‐sized genotypes (Silva et al, 2021). The dwarf genotypes accumulate less biomass than the tall ones but can display a superior quality of the forage produced (Andrade et al, 2016).…”

Adding corn meal into mixed elephant grass–butterfly pea legume silages improves nutritive value and dry matter recovery

“…IRI-381 showed greater ADF content compared to Taiwan A-146 2.37 genotype. According to Silva et al (2021), tall genotypes like IRI-381 generally show greater stem elongation. The greater development of plant structural tissues increases the deposition LIG and participation of sclerenchyma, considered less digestible and a proportional reduction in more digestible tissues (Sanchês et al, 2018).…”