Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:39:29.267Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Plant and animal responses of elephant grass pasture-based systems mixed with pinto peanut

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2019

A. C. Vieira Open the ORCID record for A. C. Vieira [Opens in a new window] ,
C. J. Olivo ,
C. B. Adams ,
J. C. Sauthier ,
L. R. Proença ,
M. D. F. A. de Oliveira ,
P. B. dos Santos ,
H. P. Schiafino ,
T. J. Tonin  and
G. L. de Godoy
...Show all authors
A. C. Vieira*
Affiliation:
Animal Science Research Programme, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
C. J. Olivo
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
C. B. Adams
Affiliation:
Faculty of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
J. C. Sauthier
Affiliation:
Faculty of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
L. R. Proença
Affiliation:
Faculty of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
M. D. F. A. de Oliveira
Affiliation:
Faculty of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
P. B. dos Santos
Affiliation:
Faculty of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
H. P. Schiafino
Affiliation:
Faculty of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
T. J. Tonin
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
G. L. de Godoy
Affiliation:
Faculty of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
M. Arrial
Affiliation:
Faculty of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
L. G. Casagrande
Affiliation:
Faculty of Animal Science, Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
*
Author for correspondence: A. C. Vieira, E-mail: alinecardosovieira@yahoo.com.br
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The effects of growing pinto peanut mixed with elephant grass-based pastures are still little known. The aim of the current research was to evaluate the performance of herbage yield, nutritive value of forage and animal responses to levels of pinto peanut forage mass mixed with elephant grass in low-input systems. Three grazing systems were evaluated: (i) elephant grass-based (control); (ii) pinto peanut, low-density forage yield (63 g/kg of dry matter – DM) + elephant grass; and (iii) pinto peanut, high-density dry matter forage yield (206 g/kg DM) + elephant grass. The experimental design was completely randomized with the three treatments (grazing systems) and three replicates (paddocks) in split-plot grazing cycles. Forage samples were collected to evaluate the pasture and animal responses. Leaf blades of elephant grass and the other companion grasses of pinto peanut were collected to analyse the crude protein, in vitro digestible organic matter and total digestible nutrients. The pinto peanut, high-density dry matter forage yield + elephant grass treatment was found to give the best results in terms of herbage yield, forage intake and stocking rate, as well as having higher crude protein contents for both elephant grass and the other grasses, followed by pinto peanut with low-density forage yield + elephant grass and finally elephant grass alone. Better results were found with the grass–legume system for pasture and animal responses.

Keywords

Arachis pintoilactating cowsnutritive valuePennisetum purpureumproduction systems
Type
Animal Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 157 , Issue 1 , January 2019 , pp. 63 - 71
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdul-Baki, AA, Bryan, HH, Klassen, W and Codallo, M (2002) Propagation and establishment of perennial peanuts for ground covers along roadsides and highway ramps. Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society 115, 267–272.Google Scholar
Alvares, CA, Stape, JL, Sentelhas, PC, Gonçalves, JLM and Sparovek, G (2013) Köppen's climate classification map for Brazil. Meteorologische Zeitschrift 22, 711–728.Google Scholar
AOAC – Association of Official Analytical Chemists (1995) Official Methods of Analysis. Washington, DC, USA: Association of Official Agricultural Chemists.Google Scholar
Assmann, TS, Assmann, AL, Soares, AB, Cassol, LC, Giasson, MS and Giasson, NF (2007) Nitrogen biological fixation by clover plants (Trifolium spp) on crop-pasture systems in southern Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 36, 1435–1442.Google Scholar
Atienza, SG and Rubiales, D (2017) Legumes in sustainable agriculture. Crop and Pasture Science 68, i–ii, https://doi.org/10.1071/CPv68n11_FO.Google Scholar
Azevedo Junior, RL, Olivo, CJ, Meinerz, GR, Agnolin, CA, Diehl, MS, Moro, G, Parra, CLC, Quatrin, MP and Horst, T (2012) Produtividade de sistemas forrageiros consorciados com amendoim forrageiro ou trevo vermelho. Ciência Rural 42, 2043–2050.Google Scholar
Barber, WPB, Adamson, AH and Altman, JFB (1984) New methods of feed evaluation. In Haresign, W and Cole, DJA (eds), Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition. London, UK: Butterworths, pp. 161–176.Google Scholar
Carvalho, GGP and Pires, AJV (2008) Leguminosas tropicais herbáceas em associação com pastagens. Revista Archivos de Zootecnia 57, 103–113.Google Scholar
Cavalcante, M and Lira, MA (2010) Variabilidade genética em Pennisetum purpureum Schumacher. Revista Caatinga 23, 153–163.Google Scholar
Comissão de Química e Fertilidade do Solo – RS/SC (2004) Manual de Adubação e Calagem para os Estados do Rio Grande do Sul e Santa Catarina. Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil: Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência do Solo.Google Scholar
Costa, DS, Barbosa, RM and Sá, ME (2010) Sistemas de produção de cultivares de feijoeiro em consórcio com milho. Scientia Agraria 11, 425–430.Google Scholar
Crestani, S, Ribeiro Filho, HMN, Miguel, MF, de Almeida, EX and Santos, FAP (2013) Steers performance in dwarf elephant grass pastures alone or mixed with Arachis pintoi. Tropical Animal Health and Production 45, 1369–1374.Google Scholar
de Andrade, EA, Ribeiro-Filho, HMN, de Liz, DM, Almeida, JGR, Miguel, MF, Raupp, GT, Ramos, FR and Almeida, EX (2014) Herbage intake, methane emissions and animal performance of steers grazing dwarf elephant grass with or without access to Arachis pintoi pastures. Tropical Grasslands – Forrajes Tropicales 2, 4–5.Google Scholar
Delagarde, R, Prache, S, D'Hour, P and Petit, M (2001) Ingestion de l'herbe par les ruminants au pâturage. Fourrages 166, 189–212.Google Scholar
Deresz, F, Matos, LL, Mozzer, OL, Martins, CE, Aroeira, LJM, Verneque, RS and Coser, AC (2003) Produção de leite de vacas mestiças Holandês’ Zebu em pastagem de capim-elefante, com e sem suplementação de concentrado durante a época das chuvas. Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia 55, 334–340.Google Scholar
Diehl, MS, Olivo, CJ, Agnolin, CA, de Azevedo Junior, RL, Bratz, VF and dos Santos, JC (2014) Massa de forragem e valor nutritivo de capim elefante, azevém e espécies de crescimento espontâneo consorciadas com amendoim forrageiro ou trevo vermelho. Ciência Rural 44, 1845–1852.Google Scholar
Döbereiner, J (1997) Biological nitrogen fixation in the tropics: social and economic contributions. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 29, 771–774.Google Scholar
Hakala, K and Jauhiainen, L (2007) Yield and nitrogen concentration of above- and below-ground biomasses of red clover cultivars in pure stands and in mixtures with three grass species in northern Europe. Grass and Forage Science 62, 312–321.Google Scholar
Ludwig, RL, Lovato, T, Pizzani, R, Goulart, RZ and Schaefer, PE (2010) Produção e qualidade do Arachis pintoi. Enciclopédia Biosfera 6, 1–14.Google Scholar
Miranda, CHB, Vieira, A and Cadisch, G (2003) Determinação da fixação biológica de nitrogênio no amendoim forrageiro (Arachis spp.) por intermédio da abundância natural de 15N. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 32, 1859–1865.Google Scholar
Olivo, CJ, Charão, PS, Pereira, LET, Ziech, MF, Meinerz, G and Tyska, D (2007) Produtividade e valor nutritivo de pasto de capim-elefante manejado sob princípios agroecológicos. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 36, 1729–1735.Google Scholar
Olivo, CJ, Diehl, MS, Agnolin, CA, Bratz, VF, Aguirre, PF and Sauter, CP (2017) Forage systems mixed with forage legumes grazed by lactating cows. Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences 39, 19–26.Google Scholar
Pachas, ANA, Shelton, HM, Lambrides, CJ, Dalzell, SA, Murtagh, GJ and Hardner, CM (2018) Effect of tree density on competition between Leucaena leucocephala and Chloris gayana using a Nelder Wheel trial. II. Belowground interactions. Crop and Pasture Science 69, 733–744.Google Scholar
Pedreira, CGS, Rosseto, FAA, da Silva, SC, Nussio, LG, Moreno, LSB, Lima, MLP and Leme, PR (2005) Forage yield and grazing efficiency on rotationally stocked pastures of ‘Tanzania-1’ Guinea grass and ‘Guaçu’ elephant grass. Scientia Agricola 62, 433–439.Google Scholar
Peyraud, JL, Le Gall, A and Lüscher, A (2009) Potential food production from forage legume-based-systems in Europe: an overview. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 48, 115–135.Google Scholar
Primavesi, A (2002) Manejo Ecológico do solo: a Agricultura em Regiões Tropicais. São Paulo, SP, Brazil: Nobel.Google Scholar
SAS Institute (2016) SAS Studio User's Guide Version 3.5. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Silva, GP, Fialho, CA, Carvalho, LR, Fonseca, L, Carvalho, PCF, Bremm, C and Da Silva, SC (2018) Sward structure and short-term herbage intake in Arachis pintoi cv. Belmonte subjected to varying intensities of grazing. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 156, 92–99.Google Scholar
Soil Survey Staff (2014) Keys to Soil Taxonomy, 12th Edn. Washington, D.C., USA: USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service.Google Scholar
Tilley, JMA and Terry, RA (1963) A two-stage technique of the in vitro digestion of forage crop. Journal of the British Grasslands Society 18, 104–111.Google Scholar
Traill, S, Bell, LW, Dalgliesh, NP, Wilson, A, Ramony, L and Guppy, C (2018) Tropical forage legume provide large nitrogen benefits to maize except when fodder is removed. Crop and Pasture Science 69, 183–193.Google Scholar