Forage mass and nutritional value of elephant grass intercropped with forage legumes<sup>1</sup>

Forage-legume systems are a sustainable and competitive alternative for improving pasture yield and quality because of the symbiotic nitrogen fixation capacity and high nutritional value of legumes. This study aimed to evaluate the forage mass, nutritional value, and nutrient export rate in three forage systems (FS): FS1, with elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum) (EG), annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) (AR), and spontaneous growth species (SGS); FS2, with EG + AR + SGS + arrowleaf clover (Trifolum vesiculosum); and FS3, with EG + AR + SGS + forage peanut (Arachis pintoi ). The experiment was arranged in a completely randomized design, with three replicates, and repeated measures over time. Results of pre-grazing forage mass were 3.5, 3.8, and 3.9 t/ha, and crude protein export were 1.4, 2.1, and 2.3 t/ha, for the treatments FS1, FS2 and FS3, respectively. Highest crude protein, in situ dry matter digestibility and total digestible nutrients, and lowest neutral detergent fiber were found in the intercropping system with forage peanut, especially in winter. Nutritional values were also better in legume-systems than the non-legume system.

Keywords:
Arachis pintoi; Crude protein; Digestibility; Neutral detergent fiber; Trifolum vesiculosum.

Authorship

Daiane Cristine Seibt ^**Corresponding author: daianecseibt@gmail.com

Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Departamento de Zootecnia, Santa Maria, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. daianecseibt@gmail.com; clairolivo@yahoo.com.br; viniciusalessio@hotmail.com; carolsauter26@gmail.com; viniciusbratz@hotmail.com; priscilafloresaguirre@yahoo.com.br Universidade Federal de Santa MariaBrazilSanta Maria, Rio Grande do Sul, BrazilUniversidade Federal de Santa Maria, Departamento de Zootecnia, Santa Maria, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. daianecseibt@gmail.com; clairolivo@yahoo.com.br; viniciusalessio@hotmail.com; carolsauter26@gmail.com; viniciusbratz@hotmail.com; priscilafloresaguirre@yahoo.com.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7521-0473

Clair Jorge Olivo

Vinicius Alessio

Caroline Paim Sauter

Vinicius Felipe Bratz

Priscila Flôres Aguirre

*Corresponding author: daianecseibt@gmail.com

This work is part of the first author’s Master Dissertation.

There is no conflict of interests in carrying the research and publishing the manuscript.

SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Figures | Tables

Figures (1)
Tables (6)

Thumbnail

Figure 1
Climate variables, normal and observed over the experimental period, for rain and air temperature. Santa Maria, 2013-2014.

Thumbnail

Table 1:
P-values of the mixed models

Thumbnail

Table 2:
Pre-grazing forage mass and botanical composition of pasture in different forage systems (FS). Santa Maria, 2013-2014

Thumbnail

Table 3: Post-grazing
forage mass and botanical composition of pasture in different forage systems (FS). Santa Maria, 2013-2014

Thumbnail

Table 4:
Nutritional value of the forage elephant grass in different forage systems (FS). Santa Maria, 2013-2014

Thumbnail

Table 5:
Nutritional value of the forage between rows in different forage systems (FS). Santa Maria, 2013-2014

Thumbnail

Table 6:
Export of nutrients in different forage systems (FS). Santa Maria, 2013-2014

Figure 1 Climate variables, normal and observed over the experimental period, for rain and air temperature. Santa Maria, 2013-2014.

Table 1: P-values of the mixed models

Effect	P-value¹
Pre-grazing variables	Forage mass	Elephant grass	Senescent material of elephant grass	Species of spontaneous growth	Ryegrass	Legume	Dead material between rows
Season (S)	<.0001	<.0001	0.2871	<.0001	0.6097	0.0012	<.0001
Forage system (FS)	0.0497	0.0495	0.0702	0.0008	0.0372	0.0036	0.0004
Interaction S x FS	0.1747	0.1267	0.2242	0.0003	0.8309	0.0020	<.0001
Post-grazing variables	Forage mass	Elephant grass	Senescent material of elephant grass	Species of spontaneous growth	Ryegrass	Legume	Dead material between rows
Season (S)	<.0001	<.0001	<.0001	<.0001	0.0607	0.0003	<.0001
Forage system (FS)	0.4450	0.0718	0.0344	0.0005	0.2181	0.0008	0.0277
Interaction S x FS	0.0332	0.0857	0.1518	0.0314	0.1447	0.0010	0.0413
Variables of the nutritional value of the forage elephant grass			NDF²	CP³	Digestibility⁴	TDN⁵
Season (S)			0.0002	0.0185	0.0034	0.6834
Forage system (FS)			0.2329	0.0272	0.8354	0.4805
Interaction S x FS			0.7601	0.4194	0.1074	0.1296
Variables of the nutritional value of the forage between rows			NDF	CP	Digestibility	TDN
Season (S)			<.0001	<.0001	<.0001	<.0001
Forage system (FS)			<.0001	<.0001	0.0018	0.0018
Interaction S x FS			0.0027	0.0079	<.0001	0.0034
Export nutrients variables		Grazing efficiency	Forage export	Crude protein export	Nitrogen export	TDN export	Stocking rate
Season (S)		<.0001	<.0001	<.0001	<.0001	<.0001	<.0001
Forage system (FS)		0.2980	0.1435	0.0310	0.0322	0.1364	0.3268
Interaction S x FS		0.1759	0.1224	0.1309	0.1032	0.0714	0.0405

¹
P-values according Student's t test. ²NDF = Neutral detergent fiber. ³CD = Crude protein. ⁴ In situ dry matter digestibility. ⁵TDN = Total digestible nutrients.

Table 2: Pre-grazing forage mass and botanical composition of pasture in different forage systems (FS). Santa Maria, 2013-2014

FS	Season*				Mean (CI)
FS	Winter	Spring	Summer	Autumn	Mean (CI)
	Forage mass (kg of DM/ha)
NL¹	ns	ns	ns	ns	3465^B (3189 - 3742)
AC²	ns	ns	ns	ns	3803^AB (3526 - 4080)
FP³	ns	ns	ns	ns	3912^A (3635 - 4189)
Mean (CI)	1853^b (1605 - 2102)	4383^a (4134 - 4632)	4444^a (4196 - 4693)	4226^a (3978 - 4475)
	Forage present in the row
	Elephant grass (%)
NL	-	ns	ns	ns	28.9^B (22.2 - 35.5)
AC	-	ns	ns	ns	40.5^A (33.9 - 47.2)
FP	-	ns	ns	ns	31.7^AB (25.0 - 38.3)
Mean (CI)	-	18.0^c (13.9 - 22.1)	37.9^b (33.8 - 42.1)	45.1^a (41.0 - 49.2)
	Forage present between rows
	Species of spontaneous growth (%)
NL	23.6^A (19.7 - 27.5)	30.3^A (28.2 - 32.4)	50.5^A (42.4 - 58.7)	53.9^A (44.2 - 63.7)	ns
AC	17.5^B (13.6 - 21.4)	15.7^B (13.6 - 17.8)	38.2^B (30.1 - 46.3)	38.5^B (28.7 - 48.2)	ns
FP	24.9^A (21.0 - 28.8)	14.0^B (11.9 - 16.1)	28.3^B (20.2 (36.5)	23.1^C (13.3 - 32.8)	ns
Mean (CI)	22.0^b (19.7 - 24.2)	20.0^b (18.8 - 21.2)	39.0^a (34.3 - 43.7)	38.5^a (32.9 - 44.1)
	Ryegrass (%)
NL	ns	ns	ns	ns	33.9^A (28.3 - 32.7)
AC	ns	ns	ns	ns	24.4^B (18.8 - 30.0)
FP	ns	ns	ns	ns	24.0^B (18.5 - 29.6)
	Legume (%)
AC	3.3^B (-3.6 - 10.2)	21.0^A (15.0 - 27.0)	12.4^B (4.6 - 20.2)	0.0^B (-2.1 - 2.2)	ns
FP	26.7^A (19.8 - 33.6)	28.6^A (22.6 - 34.7)	29.0^A (21.3 - 36.8)	29.4^A (27.3 - 31.5)	ns
Mean (CI)	15.0^b (10.1 - 19.9)	24.8^a (20.6 - 29.1)	20.7^a (15.2 - 26.2)
	Dead material between rows (%)
NL	ns	ns	ns	ns	21.1^A (19.3 - 22.8)
AC	ns	ns	ns	ns	20.8^A (19.0 - 22.6)
FP	ns	ns	ns	ns	13.2^B (11.6 - 15.0)
Mean (CI)	39.9^{a (}37.8 - 42.0)	18.3^b (15.6 - 21.0)	10.9^c (10.1 - 11.7)	4.3^d (4.0 - 4.7)

¹
NL = elephant grass, without legume; ²AC = elephant grass + arrowleaf clover; ³FP = elephant grass + forage peanut. Means followed by capital letters in the columns and lowercase letters in the lines differ (P ≤ 0.05) according Student's t test. ns = not significant. CI = 95% confidence interval. *Two grazing cycles per season.

Table 3: Post-grazing forage mass and botanical composition of pasture in different forage systems (FS). Santa Maria, 2013-2014

FS	Season*				Mean (CI)
FS	Winter	Spring	Summer	Autumn	Mean (CI)
	Forage mass (kg of DM/ha)
NL¹	1350^A (1181 - 1519)	2971^A (2471 - 3471)	2384^B (2135 - 2633)	2458^A (2261 - 2656)	ns
AC²	1312^A (1143 - 1481)	2838^A (2338 - 3339)	2331^B (2083 - 2580)	2472^A (2274 - 2670)	ns
FP³	1156^A (987 - 1325)	3056^A (2556 - 3557)	2901^A (2652 - 3150)	2400^A (2202 - 2597)	ns
Mean (CI)	1273^c (1175 - 1370)	2955^a (2667 - 3244)	2539^b (2395 - 2682)	2443^b (2329 - 2557)
	Forage present in the row
	Elephant grass (%)
Mean	-	2.5^b (2.2 - 2.9)	19.8^ab (16.1 - 23.5)	26.7^a (20.3 - 33.1)
	Senescent material of elephant grass (%)
NL	-	ns	ns	ns	1.1^B (0.5 - 1.6)
AC	-	ns	ns	ns	2.6^A (1.9 - 3.2)
FP	-	ns	ns	ns	1.5^AB (0.8 - 2.1)
Mean (CI)		0.5^c (-0.1 - 1.1)	1.5^b (0.9 - 2.1)	3.2^a (2.6 - 3.7)
	Forage present between rows
	Species of spontaneous growth (%)
NL	29.6^A (22.2 - 37.1)	36.8^A (29.4 - 44.3)	67.4^A (60.0 - 74.9)	67.5^A (60.0 - 74.9)	ns
AC	24.1^A (16.6 - 31.5)	30.4^AB (23.0 - 37.8)	51.5^B (44.1 - 59.0)	48.4^B (41.0 - 55.9)	ns
FP	20.2^A (12.8 - 27.6)	24.3^B (16.9 - 31.7)	33.2^C (25.8 - 40.7)	39.8^C (32.3 - 47.2)	ns
Mean (CI)	24.6^b (20.4 - 28.9)	30.5^b (26.2 - 34.9)	50.7^a (46.5 - 55.0)	51.9^a (47.1 - 56.2)
	Legume (%)
AC	ns	ns	ns	ns	9.0^B (1.8 - 11.6)
FP	ns	ns	ns	ns	29.8^A (24.9 - 34.7)
Mean (CI)	19.2ª (14.0 - 24.4)	22.7ª (18.5 - 26.9)	20.8ª (17.4 - 24.3)	10.3^b (8.4 - 12.2)

	Dead material between rows (%)
NL	50.9^A (38.4 - 63.4)	35.4^A (27.7 - 43.2)	16.4^A (9.8 - 22.9)	9.7^A (6.1 - 13.3)	ns
AC	54.1^A (41.5 - 66.6)	30.6^AB (22.9 - 38.3)	15.0^A (8.5 - 21.6)	13.0^A (9.4 - 16.7)	ns
FP	27.6^B (15.1 - 40.2)	22.4^B (14.7 - 30.1)	15.4^A (8.9 - 22.0)	11.4^A (7.8 - 15.0)	ns
Mean (CI)	44.2^a (37.0 - 51.4)	29.5^b (25.0 - 33.9)	15.6^c (11.8 - 19.4)	11.4^c (9.3 - 13.5)

¹
NL = elephant grass, without legume; ²AC = elephant grass + arrowleaf clover; ³FP = elephant grass + forage peanut. Means followed by capital letters in the columns and lowercase letters in the lines differ (P ≤ 0.05) according Student's t test. ns = not significant. CI = 95% confidence interval. *Two grazing cycles per season.

Table 4: Nutritional value of the forage elephant grass in different forage systems (FS). Santa Maria, 2013-2014

SF	Season*			Mean (CI)
SF	Spring	Summer	Autumn	Mean (CI)
	Neutral detergent fiber (%)
Mean (CI)	58.7^b (57.0 - 60.4)	65.1^a (63.4 - 66.8)	60.3^b (58.6 - 62.0)
	Crude protein (%)
NL	ns	ns	ns	16.7^B (16.0 - 17.4)
AC	ns	ns	ns	16.7^B (16.0 - 17.5)
FP	ns	ns	ns	18.1^A (17.4 - 18.8)
Mean (CI)	17.3^a (16.7 -18.0)	17.8^a (17.2 - 18.4)	16.4^b (15.8 - 17.1)
	In situ dry matter digestibility (%)
Mean (CI)	80.6^a (79.5 - 81.8)	78.8^b (77.7 - 80.0)	78.9^b (77.8 - 80.1)

¹
NL = elephant grass, without legume; ²AC = elephant grass + arrowleaf clover; ³FP = elephant grass + forage peanut. Means followed by capital letters in the columns and lowercase letters in the lines differ (P ≤ 0.05) according Student's t test. ns = not significant. CI = 95% confidence interval. *Two grazing cycles per season.

Table 5: Nutritional value of the forage between rows in different forage systems (FS). Santa Maria, 2013-2014

SF	Season*
SF	Winter	Spring	Summer	Autumn
	Neutral detergent fiber (%)
NL¹	49.5^AB (45.0 - 54.0)	64.6^A (61.2 - 68.1)	64.6^A (61.7 - 67.5)	62.4^A (59.1 - 65.7)
AC²	55.4^A (50.9 - 59.9)	56.4^B (53.0 - 59.9)	65.1^A (62.2 - 68.0)	64.2^A (60.9 - 67.5)
FP³	49.0^B (44.5 - 53.4)	57.0^B (53.6 - 60.5)	54.8^B (51.9 - 57.7)	48.9^B (45.6 - 52.2)
Mean (CI)	51.3^b (48.7 - 53.7)	59.4^a (57.4 - 61.4)	61.5^a (59.8 - 63.2)	58.5^a (56.6 - 60.4)
	Crude protein (%)
NL	19.6^B (18.4 - 20.9)	11.2^B (10.0 - 12.5)	12.0^C (10.7 - 13.3)	12.0^B (10.7 - 13.2)
AC	19.6^B (18.3 - 20.9)	14.7^A (13.4 - 15.9)	15.4^B (14.1 - 16.6)	13.3^B (12.0 - 14.6)
FP	24.2^A (23.0 - 25.5)	15.5^A (14.3 - 16.8)	19.8^A (18.5 - 21.1)	18.3^A (17.0 - 19.6)
Mean (CI)	21.2^a (20.4 - 21.9)	13.8^c (13.1 - 14.5)	15.7^b (15.0 - 16.4)	14.5^c (13.8 - 15.3)
	In situ dry matter digestibility (%)
NL	85.1^A (79.2- 90.9)	67.3^B (65.8 - 68.9)	73.1^B (71.9 - 74.4)	74.7^B (70.0 - 79.3)
AC	74.2^B (68.3 - 80.0)	74.0^A (72.5 - 75.5)	72.3^B (71.1 - 73.6)	70.8^B (66.1 - 75.4)
FP	88.0^A (82.2 - 93.9)	72.8^A (71.3 - 74.3)	80.5^A (79.3 - 81.8)	83.1^A (78.4 - 87.8)
Mean (CI)	82.4^a (79.0 - 85.8)	71.4^c (70.5 - 72.2)	75.3^b (74.6 - 76.1)	76.2^b (73.5 - 78.9)
	Total digestible nutrients (%)
NL	75.9^A (70.7 - 81.0)	62.5^B (61.0 - 63.9)	65.9^B (64.8 - 67.1)	67.4^B (63.3 - 71.6)
AC	66.0^B (60.8 - 71.1)	67.3^A (65.9 - 68.8)	64.9^B (63.7 - 66.1)	63.1^B (58.9 - 67.3)
FP	78.4^A (73.2 - 83.6)	66.2^A (64.7 - 67.6)	72.1^A (70.9 - 73.3)	74.8^A (70.6 - 79.0)
Mean (CI)	73.4^a (70.4 - 76.4)	65.3^c (64.5 - 66.2)	67.7^b (67.0 - 68.4)	68.5^b (66.0 - 70.9)

¹
NL = elephant grass, without legume; ²AC = elephant grass + arrowleaf clover; ³FP = elephant grass + forage peanut. Means followed by capital letters in the columns and lowercase letters in the lines differ (P ≤ 0.05) according Student's t test. CI = 95% confidence interval. *Two grazing cycles per season.

Table 6: Export of nutrients in different forage systems (FS). Santa Maria, 2013-2014

SF	Season*				Mean (CI)	Total (CI)
SF	Winter	Spring	Summer	Autumn	Mean (CI)	Total (CI)
	Grazing efficiency (%)
Mean (CI)	30.1^b (25.6 - 34.4)	33.0^b (28.6 - 37.5)	41.8^a (37.4 - 46.3)	41.0^a (36.6 - 45.5)	ns	ns
	Forage export (kg of DM/ha)
Mean (CI)	1162^c (705 - 1618)	2856^b (2399 - 3312)	3811^a (3355 - 4268)	3566^a (3109 - 4022)	ns	ns
	Crude protein export (kg/ha)
NL¹	ns	ns	ns	ns	360^B (258 - 462)	1440^B (992 - 1888)
AC²	ns	ns	ns	ns	515^A (413 - 616)	2060^AB (1611 - 2508)
FP³	ns	ns	ns	ns	563^A (462 - 665)	2253^A (1805 - 2701)
Mean (CI)	243^c (170 - 316)	447^b (374 - 520)	648^a (575 - 722)	580^a (506 - 653)
	Nitrogen export (kg/ha)
NL	ns	ns	ns	ns	57.6^B (41.2 - 74.0)	230^B (158 - 302)
AC	ns	ns	ns	ns	82.4^A (66.0 - 98.8)	330^AB (258 - 402)
FP	ns	ns	ns	ns	90.1^A (73.7 - 106.5)	360^A (288 - 432)
Mean (CI)	38.9^c (27.5 - 50.2)	71.5^b (63.4 - 79.6)	103.7^a (87.9 - 119.6)	92.7^a (83.8 - 101.7)	ns	ns
Mean (CI)	850^c (536 - 1164)	1954^b (1640 - 2268)	2654^a (2340 - 2968)	2515^a (2201 - 2829)	ns	ns
	Stocking rate (cows**/ha/day)
NL	1.4^A (1.0 - 1.7)	2.2^B (1.9 - 2.6)	2.5^B (2.2 - 2.8)	3.0^B (2.7 - 3.3)	ns	ns
AC	1.5^A (1.1 - 1.8)	2.2^B (1.9 - 2.5)	3.2^A (2.9 - 3.5)	3.9^A (3.5 - 4.2)	ns	ns
FP	1.2^A (0.8 - 1.5)	2.8^A (2.5 - 3.1)	2.7^B (2.3 - 3.0)	3.5^A (3.2 - 3.9)	ns	ns
Mean (CI)	1.3^c (1.1 - 1.5)	2.4^b (2.2 - 2.6)	2.8^ab (2.6 - 3.0)	3.5^a (3.3 - 3.6)

¹
NL = elephant grass, without legume; ²AC = elephant grass + arrowleaf clover; ³FP = elephant grass + forage peanut. Means followed by capital letters in the columns and lowercase letters in the lines differ (P ≤ 0.05) according Student's t test. CV = coefficient of variation. *Two grazing cycles per season. **Cow average weight of 570 kg.

How to cite

copy

Universidade Federal de Viçosa Av. Peter Henry Rolfs, s/n, 36570-000 Viçosa, Minas Gerais Brasil, Tel./Fax: (55 31) 3612-2078 - Viçosa - MG - Brazil
E-mail: ceres@ufv.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

Versão para download de PDF

PDF

Inglês

Versões e tradução automática

Versão original do texto

English

Tradução automática

Google Translator
Microsoft Translator

Como citar

RIS

BIBTEX

Outros formatos de citação e exportação:

SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online
Rua Dr. Diogo de Faria, 1087 – 9º andar – Vila Clementino 04037-003 São Paulo/SP - Brasil
E-mail: scielo@scielo.org