Nutritive Value of Rhizoma Peanut Growing under Varying Levels of Artificial Shade

Abstract

Producer adoption of rhizoma peanut has been limited primarily by a relatively long establishment period. 'Florigraze' rhizoma peanut (Arachis glabrata Benth.) is produc-Johnson (1990) suggested that concurrent planting of tive and persistent under moderate shade and has potential as an understory forage for grazing in southeastern U.S. pine (Pinus spp.) trees and Florigraze might facilitate use of the legume plantations. When grown in full sun, Florigraze has high forage quality, and improve the quality of forage for grazing in the but the effect of shade on its nutritive value is not known. A 2-yr understory of southeastern U.S. pine plantations. Rhifield study was conducted on a siliceous, hyperthermic Arenic Paleuzoma peanut has been shown to be persistent and prodult soil to determine nutritive value of Florigraze herbage when ductive under moderate levels of shade. When grown grown under 34, 54, 78, and 100% of incident photosynthetic photon at 54 and 78% of incident photosynthetic photon flux flux density (PPFD). Treatments were arranged in three replicates density (PPFD) during 2 yr, forage yields were 70% and of a randomized complete block design, and there were three harvests Ͼ94%, respectively, those of unshaded plants (Johnson in both 1989 and 1990. Leaf crude protein (CP) increased 20 to 40 g et al., 1994). kg Ϫ1 as PPFD increased from 34 to 100% in both years while leaf in The light environment during plant growth affects vitro organic matter digestibility (IVOMD) increased 20 to 30 g kg Ϫ1 and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) decreased 20 to 50 g kg Ϫ1 with forage nutritive value in addition to yield and persisincreasing PPFD only in the second year. Stem CP increased 10 to tence. The great majority of studies evaluating the effect 20 g kg Ϫ1 and IVOMD 50 to 100 g kg Ϫ1 with increasing PPFD in at of shade on forage nutritive value have been conducted least two harvests each year while NDF and lignin concentrations with grasses. The data are inconsistent, with responses decreased with increasing PPFD (50-80 and 15-25 g kg Ϫ1

Valor nutritivo do capim-braquiária e do amendoim forrageiro submetidos ao sombreamento

“…A leguminosa Arachis glabrata apresentou redução na porcentagem de PB tanto nas folhas quanto nos caules, quando submetida à luminosidade reduzida (Johnson et al, 2002). Já Lin et al (2001) não verificaram alteração significativa no teor de PB de leguminosas tropicais e de clima temperado submetidas a 50 e 80% de sombra, quando comparadas às plantas que se desenvolveram a pleno sol.…”

“…Com o aumento dos níveis de sombra, o teor de carboidratos solúveis nas plantas diminui (Belesky et al, 2006) e geralmente ocorre aumento concomitante do conteúdo de parede celular e redução da digestibilidade, tanto em forrageiras tropicais quanto temperadas (Castro et al, 1999;Lin et al, 2001;Johnson et al, 2002). Alguns estudos também relatam o aumento do teor showed increment (p<0.05) in crude protein content with shading.…”

“…O ambiente luminoso sob o qual as plantas se desenvolvem, afeta sua produção, persistência e valor nutritivo (Johnson et al, 2002). Isto faz com que as plantas que crescem em ambientes sombreados, como em sub-bosques de sistemas silvipastoris, apresentem variações na qualidade da forragem produzida em comparação às plantas que se desenvolvem a pleno sol.…”

Yield, maturation, and forage quality of alfalfa in a black walnut alley-cropping practice

“…Schindler 'Kobe'), paniculated tick trefoil, and Desmodium canescens L. compared to 100% light. Johnson et al (2002) found that NDF decreased in rhizoma peanut (Arachis glabrata Benth.) with increasing light.…”

Strategies to Control Competition to Strip‐Planted Legume in a Warm‐Season Grass Pasture

“…R hizoma peanut (RP) is a warm-season, vegetatively propagated, perennial legume with unique potential for incorporation into low-input forage-livestock systems in the U.S. Gulf Coast region (French et al, 1994;Castillo et al, 2013). Positive attributes of RP include drought tolerance (French, 1988), dry matter yields up to 10 to 12 Mg ha -1 yr -1 under natural rainfall conditions (Beltranena et al, 1981;Ocumpaugh, 1990), similar crude protein concentration and digestibility to alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) (Beltranena et al, 1981;Prine et al, 1981), and persistence under a wide range of management systems for hay, silage, and grazing and as an understory forage crop Ortega-S. et al, 1992;Johnson et al, 2002). Furthermore, due to its capacity to fix N 2 from the atmosphere and higher nutritive value compared to tropical grasses (Muir et al, 2011), RP may also be an alternative source of N for grasslands, improving the likelihood of long-term persistence while maintaining and/ or improving productivity of low-input forage-livestock systems Thomas, 1994).…”