Morphogenesis of elephant grass fertilized with organic compost from solid waste in small ruminants

Meneses, Abner José Girão; Cândido, Magno José Duarte; Pompeu, Roberto Cláudio Fernandes Franco; Souza, Henrique Antunes de; Guedes, Fernando Lisboa

doi:10.5935/1806-6690.20180079

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Ciência Agronômica

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Animal Science • Rev. Ciênc. Agron. 49 (4) • Oct-Dec 2018 • https://doi.org/10.5935/1806-6690.20180079 copy

Morphogenesis of elephant grass fertilized with organic compost from solid waste in small ruminants¹ 1 Parte da Dissertação de Mestrado em Zootecnia do primeiro autor, apresentada na Universidade Federal do Ceará/UFC, pesquisa apoiada pela Embrapa e FUNCAP

Morfogênese do capim-elefante adubado com composto orgânico proveniente de resíduos sólidos de pequenos ruminantes

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

This study evaluated the biomass flow of irrigated Pennisetum purpureum cv. Cameroon fertilized with different levels of organic compost made from waste derived from production and slaughter of sheep and goat farming. The experiment was conducted in a cut and carry of elephant grass for four 60 day-cycles. The treatments consisted of levels of organic compost (0; 13.3; 26.6; 39.9; 53.2; 79.8) ton ha^-1, besides a mineral treatment with nitrogen and potassium of 720 and 900 kg ha^-1 yr^-1, respectively. This was a split plot randomized block design with repeated measures over time, in which levels were assigned to plots, and cycles, to subplots. Morphogenetic characteristics of elephant grass were influenced by levels of the compost. Forage production rate had increased linearly with levels of the compost in all cycles, while the forage accumulation rate responded quadratically to doses of compost in cycles 1 and 2. The contrast analysis between organic x mineral fertilization revealed, for all cycles, except the first, superiority of morphogenetic indices for mineral fertilizer. It can be concluded that the elephant grass responded to the organic compost and it is recommended the use of 70.63 ton ha^-1.

Key words:
C:N ratio; Biomass flow; Leaf elongation rate; Mineralization; Pennisetum purpureum

Layer (m)	pH	OM	P	K	Ca	Mg	H+Al	Al	B	CEC
Layer (m)	pH	gdm^-3	------ mgdm^-3 -------		------------------------------- mmo_lcdm^-3 -------------------------------
0-0.2	7.0	16	36	31.0	50	19	13	0	74.2	87.2
0.2-0.4	7.2	7	36	31.0	54	17	12	0	76.1	88.1
	V	ESP	S	Na	Cu	Fe	Zn	Mn	B
	--------- % --------		------ mgdm^-3 -------		-------------------------------- mgdm^-3 ---------------------------------
0-0.2	85	5.08	11	102	0.5	54	1.5	38.0	0.38
0.2-0.4	86	4.84	8	98	0.5	32	1.0	20.0	0.23
	Clay		Silt		Total sand		Coarse sand		Fine sand
	----------------------------------------------------------- gkg ^-1 ------------------------------------------------------------
0-0.20	254		216		530		60		470
0.2-0.4	239		251		510		70		440

Nin	N-NO_3-	N-NH₄₊	Nt	C	C:N
------------------------------ mg kg^-1 -----------------------------			------------------- g kg^-1 ------------------		C:N
355	250	105	20.3	175	9
P	K	Ca	Mg	S	Na
-------------------------------------------------------------------- g kg^-1 ------------------------------------------------------------------
9	15.7	21.9	5.5	2.8	2.1
B	Cu	Fe	Mn	Zn	pH
----------------------------------------------------------------- mg kg^-1 ------------------------------------------------------------------
20	30	2.051	175	138	6.7

Levels tha-1	LER	SER	LSR	LAR Leaf tiller day^-1	FPR	FAR
Levels tha-1	------------------ cm tiller day^-1 -----------------			LAR Leaf tiller day^-1	---------- kg DM ha^-1 ----------
0	10.17	0.67	3.13	0.16	107.65	74.40
13.3	12.53	0.85	3.80	0.16	140.55	117.67
26.6	14.21	1.08	4.15	0.18	202.66	174.21
39.9	14.18	1.19	4.10	0.17	245.16	208.90
53.2	16.91	1.42	5.24	0.18	254.14	211.51
79.8	17.65	1.52	5.55	0.18	311.67	272.59
F significance	^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ns Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).
CV1(%)	17.9	15.5	19.9	10.5	22.6	25.2
Cycles
	16.30^a	1.56^a	5.26^a	0.15^a	261.03^a	215.51^a
2	14.47^b	1.12^b	4.69^ab	0.18^b	220.92^b	181.39^b
3	14.28^b	1.00^b	4.16^b	0.18^b	187.88^c	158.43^bc
4	12.04^c	0.79c	3.1c	0.18_b	171.39^c	150.86^c
F significance	25.35^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	84.09^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	30.24^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	21.05^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	24.06^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	15.59^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).
CV₂(%)	11.9	15.4	18.4	8.2	18.8	20.4
LSD	1.29	0.13	0.60	0.01	30.26	27.58
L x C	^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ns Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ Means followed by different letters are significantly different (P<0.05) by Tukey’s testns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).

Treatment	LER	SER	TLSR	LAR Day leaf^-1	FPR	FAR	TPD
Treatment	--------- cmtillerday^-1 ----------			LAR Day leaf^-1	-- kg DMhaday^-1 --		tillerm²
Cycle 1
Means of the compost levels	16.30	1.56	5.26	0.15	261.03	215.51	56.75
Mean fertilizer mineral	17.01	1.39	5.93	0.15	278.93	232.39	65.50
F significance	^ns ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ns ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ns ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ns ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ns ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ns ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ns ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().
Cycle 2
Means of the compost levels	14.47	1.12	4.69	0.18	220.91	181.38	78.41
Mean fertilizer mineral	17.17	1.50	5.88	0.17	342.19	274.12	92.00
F significance	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ns ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^* ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().
Cycle 3
Means of the compost levels	14.28	1.00	4.16	0.18	187.87	158.43	54.83
Mean fertilizer mineral	17.37	1.48	5.52	0.17	404.22	319.22	84.00
F significance	^* ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ns ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).
Cycle 4
Means of the compost levels	12.04	0.79	3.16	0.17	171.39	150.86	59.41
Mean fertilizer mineral	18.79	1.44	4.20	0.20	323.28	291.23	52.00
F significance	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^* ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 () and 0.05 (*).	^ns ns (non-significant) and significant at 0.01 (*) and 0.05 ().

Universidade Federal do Ceará Av. Mister Hull, 2977 - Bloco 487, Campus do Pici, 60356-000 - Fortaleza - CE - Brasil, Tel.: (55 85) 3366-9702 / 3366-9732, Fax: (55 85) 3366-9417 - Fortaleza - CE - Brazil
E-mail: ccarev@ufc.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] *Author for correspondence

Brasil

Brasil

Morphogenesis of elephant grass fertilized with organic compost from solid waste in small ruminants1 1 Parte da Dissertação de Mestrado em Zootecnia do primeiro autor, apresentada na Universidade Federal do Ceará/UFC, pesquisa apoiada pela Embrapa e FUNCAP

Morfogênese do capim-elefante adubado com composto orgânico proveniente de resíduos sólidos de pequenos ruminantes

ABSTRACT

Morphogenesis of elephant grass fertilized with organic compost from solid waste in small ruminants¹ 1 Parte da Dissertação de Mestrado em Zootecnia do primeiro autor, apresentada na Universidade Federal do Ceará/UFC, pesquisa apoiada pela Embrapa e FUNCAP