Forage Yield and Quality for Monocrops and Mixtures of Small Grain Cereals

Abstract

that sufficient compaction occurs for exclusion of O 2 , that the fermentation processes of ensiling occur, and Cereals are an important substrate for silage production in the that overheating does not occur. However, moisture short growing season of the northern Prairies. Our objectives were to determine the effects of seeding rate, species, and harvest date contents Ͼ700 g kg Ϫ1 can lead to seepage problems from on the forage yield and quality of cereals. Three field studies were the silo or pit, nutrient loss due to leakage, dilution of conducted to evaluate the productivity of barley (Hordeum vulgare acid levels, and poor preservation of the silage. Ensiling L.), oat (Avena sativa L.), triticale (ϫ Triticosecale rimpaui Wittm.), does not increase the quality of the feedstuffs, so it is and rye (Secale cereale L.) grown as monocrops or in various mixtures.important that high-quality material is put into the silo. Seeding rates ranged from 250 to 750 seeds m Ϫ2 . Harvest times wereThe value of high-quality forage for high production based on the maturity of the principal cereal in each mixture. Few rates from ruminant animals was discussed by Waldo effects of seeding rate on yield or quality were found, but when effects and Jorgensen (1981) and Linn and Martin (1989). Highwere found, higher seeding rates were associated with higher yields, quality forage must have high intake, digestibility, and lower moisture content, and higher fiber content. All treatments proefficiency of utilization. Cell walls are an important comduced high quality forage as measured by neutral detergent fiber (NDF), from 515 g kg Ϫ1 for early-harvested tests to 656 g kg Ϫ1 for ponent determining quality. They have a digestible and late-harvested tests, and acid detergent fiber (ADF) contents, from an indigestible fraction. Neutral detergent fiber content 310 g kg Ϫ1 for early-harvested tests to 387 g kg Ϫ1 for late-harvested is a measure of the total cell wall fraction. Acid detertests. Protein was low, ranging from 61.5 to 101.0 g kg Ϫ1 . Biomass gent fiber content is a measure of the indigestible fracyields ranged from 10.1 to 16.5 Mg ha Ϫ1 in the barley cultivar tests, tion. When cell wall content of feed is low, increased 7.0 to 18.5 Mg ha Ϫ1 in the spring cereal tests, and 10.8 to 12.2 Mg intake and digestibility by animals is expected. Protein ha Ϫ1 in the winter cereal tests. Although, some exceptions occurred, content is an important feed factor per se, with highforage yield and quality of cereal mixtures were generally intermediate quality feed having a high protein content. Chemical to monocrop production, especially for moisture and fiber content, composition and nutritive value of green plant material suggesting that planting species mixtures could extend the harvest can give useful information about the quality of the period and result in higher-quality silage.resulting silage (Kjos, 1990).Compositionally, legumes are known to have higher protein and lower cell wall fractions but higher lignin ral Development,

Valor nutricional da planta, padrões de fermentação e qualidade da silagem de triticale em seis idades de corte

“…No entanto, os valores observados para as concentrações de FDN, entre as idades de corte de 80 a 108 dias, e de FDA, entre as idades de corte de 80 a 94 dias, da forragem verde, podem ser considerados elevados em relação aos relatados na literatura. Ao avaliar o efeito do estádio de desenvolvimento das plantas (89 a 122 dias pós-semeadura) de três cultivares de triticale no período de inverno, em Jaboticabal (SP), Jobim et al (1996) (Juskiw et al, 2000). Estudando diversos aspectos relacionados à fertilização da cultivar de triticalePresto, colhido no estádio de botão floral, Harmoney & Thompson (2005) relataram concentrações (% da MS) de PB, FDN e FDA, respectivamente, nas faixas de 5,8 a 13,8%; de 61,5 a 64,5% e de 38,1 a 41,3%.…”

Producción y valor nutritivo en fracciones de forraje de trigos imberbes

“…Cereals have characteristics that make them especially useful for fodder, producing high yields and are rich in protein, vitamins and carbohydrates, (Cherney and Marten, 1982;Cash et al, 2004), has been classified as a good quality Los cereales presentan características que los hacen especialmente útiles para forraje, ya que producen altos rendimientos y son ricos en proteínas, vitaminas e hidratos de carbono, (Cherney y Marten, 1982;Cash et al, 2004), se les ha clasificado como un recurso forrajero de buena calidad (Hart et al, 1971;Juskiw et al, 2000 ). Herrera (1999), al referirse a la calidad para fuentes forrajeras menciona que forrajes de baja calidad son aquellos cuyo porcentaje de fibra detergente neutro (FDN) sea mayor al 60%, la fibra detergente ácido (FDA) mayor a 35%, energía neta de lactancia (ENL) menor de 1.4 Mcal/kg.…”

“…Herrera (1999), al referirse a la calidad para fuentes forrajeras menciona que forrajes de baja calidad son aquellos cuyo porcentaje de fibra detergente neutro (FDN) sea mayor al 60%, la fibra detergente ácido (FDA) mayor a 35%, energía neta de lactancia (ENL) menor de 1.4 Mcal/kg. El contenido de proteína es un importante factor alimenticio per se; así, alimentos con alto contenido de proteína, son también considerados de alta calidad (Juskiw et al, 2000). En evaluación de calidad forrajera, Castro (1976) reporta que en cebada, avena, trigo y triticale, no hubo diferencia en contenido de proteína entre especies, encontrándose un promedio de 35 por ciento en las primeras etapas de desarrollo y 7% a la mitad del espigamiento.…”

“…En los forrajes es de vital importancia considerar el valor nutritivo, reportándose en general una disminución del mismo conforme la planta madura (Juskiw et al, 2000). Así, el incremento de FDA y FDN se ha reportado en cereales como respuesta al avance en madurez (Cherney et al, 1983).…”

“…Así, el incremento de FDA y FDN se ha reportado en cereales como respuesta al avance en madurez (Cherney et al, 1983). Las hojas y espigas presentan por lo general mayor digestibilidad y proteína que los tallos (Baron y Kibite, 1987) y por lo tanto pueden contener mayor calidad forrajera, sin embargo, son pocos los trabajos en los que se estudia el valor nutritivo de estas fracciones, aunque en algunos de ellos como en cebada se ha establecido que un incremento del valor energético relacionado con una mayor proporción de grano en etapas de madurez del grano, que favorece también el contenido de proteína e incrementa los indicadores de calidad, debido a la dilución de la fibra indigestible por el grano (Ben-Ghedalia et al, 1995;Juskiw et al, 2000).…”