Structural, productive and bromatologic characteristcs of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses fertilized with some macronutrients
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/15881 |
Resumo: | The aim this study was to evaluate the effect of fertilization of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses with some macronutrients on the structural, productive and bromatologic characteristics. Were evaluated two grasses (Cynodon dactylon cv. Tifton 85 and C. dactylon cv. Jiggs) and five sources of fertilizer (three formulations NPK: 08-28-16, 30-00-20 and 20-10-10, and two sources nitrogen: urea and super N) in a factorial scheme 2 x 5, distributed in a completely randomized design with four replications. The planting of grasses without fertilization was performed to simulate a pasture located in low natural fertility. The highest yields (P = 0.009) and ratios of leaves (P < 0.001) were observed in Tifton 85 grass, resulting in a lower proportion of stems when compared to Jiggs grass. The sources of fertilizers used changed the weight and the proportion of leaves and stems, as well as the leaf/stem ratio, number of tillers and mass production of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses. There was a significative interaction between the study factors (grass and fertilizer) for concentrations of DM (P = 0.024), ADF (P = 0.012), hemicellulose (P = 0.007), DMD (P = 0.012), TDN (P = 0.012), DE (p = 0.012) and ME (P = 0.012) leaves and the protein content (p = 0.016) of the stem. In general, the application of 30-00-20 fertilizer resulted in lower ADF content in the leaves of Tifton 85 grass and higher DM, with higher energy content also, and providing super N implied lower ADF content and higher DM digestibility of Jiggs grass leaves. In the whole plant, the Jiggs grass had higher NDF (P = 0.017) compared to Tifton 85 grass, however, the concentration of ADF that grass was lower (P < 0.001) than Tifton 85 grass, which resulted in higher DM (P < 0.001) and energy intake (P < 0.001). The application of super N decreased the ADF content (P = 0.026) of grasses, mainly from Jiggs, implying an increase in the digestibility of DM (P = 0.026) and energy content (P = 0.026). Although there are differences between the two grasses, productive and nutritional characteristics make these excellent forage options for the introduction in livestock systems. The supply of NPK 20-10-10 and 08-28-16 formulation is suitable for the cultivation of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses by increasing mass production and improve the nutritional quality of the forage. |
id |
UEL-11_e3698bd970beb013708876541aad1da0 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/15881 |
network_acronym_str |
UEL-11 |
network_name_str |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Structural, productive and bromatologic characteristcs of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses fertilized with some macronutrientsCaracterísticas estruturais, produtivas e bromatológicas dos capins Tifton 85 e Jiggs fertilizados com alguns macronutrientesCynodon dactylonMorphologyNitrogenNutritional valuePhosphorus.Cynodon dactylonFósforoMorfologiaNitrogênioValor nutritivo.The aim this study was to evaluate the effect of fertilization of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses with some macronutrients on the structural, productive and bromatologic characteristics. Were evaluated two grasses (Cynodon dactylon cv. Tifton 85 and C. dactylon cv. Jiggs) and five sources of fertilizer (three formulations NPK: 08-28-16, 30-00-20 and 20-10-10, and two sources nitrogen: urea and super N) in a factorial scheme 2 x 5, distributed in a completely randomized design with four replications. The planting of grasses without fertilization was performed to simulate a pasture located in low natural fertility. The highest yields (P = 0.009) and ratios of leaves (P < 0.001) were observed in Tifton 85 grass, resulting in a lower proportion of stems when compared to Jiggs grass. The sources of fertilizers used changed the weight and the proportion of leaves and stems, as well as the leaf/stem ratio, number of tillers and mass production of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses. There was a significative interaction between the study factors (grass and fertilizer) for concentrations of DM (P = 0.024), ADF (P = 0.012), hemicellulose (P = 0.007), DMD (P = 0.012), TDN (P = 0.012), DE (p = 0.012) and ME (P = 0.012) leaves and the protein content (p = 0.016) of the stem. In general, the application of 30-00-20 fertilizer resulted in lower ADF content in the leaves of Tifton 85 grass and higher DM, with higher energy content also, and providing super N implied lower ADF content and higher DM digestibility of Jiggs grass leaves. In the whole plant, the Jiggs grass had higher NDF (P = 0.017) compared to Tifton 85 grass, however, the concentration of ADF that grass was lower (P < 0.001) than Tifton 85 grass, which resulted in higher DM (P < 0.001) and energy intake (P < 0.001). The application of super N decreased the ADF content (P = 0.026) of grasses, mainly from Jiggs, implying an increase in the digestibility of DM (P = 0.026) and energy content (P = 0.026). Although there are differences between the two grasses, productive and nutritional characteristics make these excellent forage options for the introduction in livestock systems. The supply of NPK 20-10-10 and 08-28-16 formulation is suitable for the cultivation of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses by increasing mass production and improve the nutritional quality of the forage. Objetivou-se avaliar o efeito da fertilização dos capins Tifton 85 e Jiggs com alguns macronutrientes sobre as características estruturais, produtivas e bromatológicas. Avaliaram-se duas forrageiras (Cynodon dactylon cv. Tifton 85 e C. dactylon cv. Jiggs) e cinco fontes de fertilizantes (três formulações NPK: 08-28-16, 30-00-20 e 20-10-10 e duas fontes de nitrogênio: ureia e super N), em esquema fatorial 2 x 5, distribuídos em delineamento inteiramente casualizado, com quatro repetições. O plantio dos capins foi realizado sem adubação, simulando uma pastagem implantada em condições de baixa fertilidade natural. As maiores produções (P = 0,009) e proporções de folhas (P < 0,001) foram verificadas no capim-Tifton 85, resultando em menor proporção de colmos quando comparado ao capim-Jiggs. As fontes de fertilizantes empregadas na adubação dos capins Tifton 85 e Jiggs alteraram o peso e a proporção de folhas e colmos, bem como a relação folha/colmo, número de perfilhos e produção de massa. Houve interação significativa entre os fatores de estudo (capim e fertilizante) quanto aos teores de MS (P = 0,024), FDA (P = 0,012), hemicelulose (P = 0,007), DMS (P = 0,012), NDT (P = 0,012), ED (P = 0,012) e EM (P = 0,012) das folhas, além do teor protéico (P = 0,016) do colmo. De maneira geral, a aplicação do fertilizante 30-00-20 resultou em menor teor de FDA nas folhas do capim-Tifton 85 e maior digestibilidade da MS, com maior teor energético também, e o fornecimento de super N implicou em menor teor de FDA e maior digestibilidade da MS das folhas do capim-Jiggs. Considerando-se a planta inteira, o capim-Jiggs apresentou maior teor de FDN (P = 0,017) em relação ao Tifton 85, entretanto, a concentração de FDA nesse capim foi menor (P < 0,001) do que o Tifton 85, o que implicou em maior digestibilidade da MS (P < 0,001) e aporte energético (P < 0,001). A aplicação do fertilizante super N diminuiu o teor de FDA (P = 0,026) dos capins, principalmente do Jiggs, implicando em acréscimo na digestibilidade da MS (P = 0,026) e aporte energético (P = 0,026). Embora existam diferenças entre os dois capins, as características produtivas e nutricionais tornam essas forrageiras excelentes opções para a introdução em sistemas pecuários. O fornecimento das formulações NPK 20-10-10 e 08-28-16 é indicado para o cultivo dos capins Tifton 85 e Jiggs por aumentar a produção de massa e melhorar a qualidade nutricional das forrageiras. UEL2015-06-10info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/1588110.5433/1679-0359.2015v36n3p1507Semina: Ciências Agrárias; Vol. 36 No. 3 (2015); 1507-1518Semina: Ciências Agrárias; v. 36 n. 3 (2015); 1507-15181679-03591676-546Xreponame:Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)instacron:UELporhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/15881/pdf_695Copyright (c) 2015 Semina: Ciências Agráriashttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessRezende, Adauton Vilela deRabelo, Flávio Henrique SilveiraRabelo, Carlos Henrique SilveiraLima, Poliana PatríciaBarbosa, Larissa de ÁvilaAbud, Marcella de CarvalhoSouza, Flávia Romam Costa2023-01-13T12:51:17Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/15881Revistahttp://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrariasPUBhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/oaisemina.agrarias@uel.br1679-03591676-546Xopendoar:2023-01-13T12:51:17Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Structural, productive and bromatologic characteristcs of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses fertilized with some macronutrients Características estruturais, produtivas e bromatológicas dos capins Tifton 85 e Jiggs fertilizados com alguns macronutrientes |
title |
Structural, productive and bromatologic characteristcs of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses fertilized with some macronutrients |
spellingShingle |
Structural, productive and bromatologic characteristcs of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses fertilized with some macronutrients Rezende, Adauton Vilela de Cynodon dactylon Morphology Nitrogen Nutritional value Phosphorus. Cynodon dactylon Fósforo Morfologia Nitrogênio Valor nutritivo. |
title_short |
Structural, productive and bromatologic characteristcs of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses fertilized with some macronutrients |
title_full |
Structural, productive and bromatologic characteristcs of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses fertilized with some macronutrients |
title_fullStr |
Structural, productive and bromatologic characteristcs of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses fertilized with some macronutrients |
title_full_unstemmed |
Structural, productive and bromatologic characteristcs of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses fertilized with some macronutrients |
title_sort |
Structural, productive and bromatologic characteristcs of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses fertilized with some macronutrients |
author |
Rezende, Adauton Vilela de |
author_facet |
Rezende, Adauton Vilela de Rabelo, Flávio Henrique Silveira Rabelo, Carlos Henrique Silveira Lima, Poliana Patrícia Barbosa, Larissa de Ávila Abud, Marcella de Carvalho Souza, Flávia Romam Costa |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Rabelo, Flávio Henrique Silveira Rabelo, Carlos Henrique Silveira Lima, Poliana Patrícia Barbosa, Larissa de Ávila Abud, Marcella de Carvalho Souza, Flávia Romam Costa |
author2_role |
author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Rezende, Adauton Vilela de Rabelo, Flávio Henrique Silveira Rabelo, Carlos Henrique Silveira Lima, Poliana Patrícia Barbosa, Larissa de Ávila Abud, Marcella de Carvalho Souza, Flávia Romam Costa |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Cynodon dactylon Morphology Nitrogen Nutritional value Phosphorus. Cynodon dactylon Fósforo Morfologia Nitrogênio Valor nutritivo. |
topic |
Cynodon dactylon Morphology Nitrogen Nutritional value Phosphorus. Cynodon dactylon Fósforo Morfologia Nitrogênio Valor nutritivo. |
description |
The aim this study was to evaluate the effect of fertilization of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses with some macronutrients on the structural, productive and bromatologic characteristics. Were evaluated two grasses (Cynodon dactylon cv. Tifton 85 and C. dactylon cv. Jiggs) and five sources of fertilizer (three formulations NPK: 08-28-16, 30-00-20 and 20-10-10, and two sources nitrogen: urea and super N) in a factorial scheme 2 x 5, distributed in a completely randomized design with four replications. The planting of grasses without fertilization was performed to simulate a pasture located in low natural fertility. The highest yields (P = 0.009) and ratios of leaves (P < 0.001) were observed in Tifton 85 grass, resulting in a lower proportion of stems when compared to Jiggs grass. The sources of fertilizers used changed the weight and the proportion of leaves and stems, as well as the leaf/stem ratio, number of tillers and mass production of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses. There was a significative interaction between the study factors (grass and fertilizer) for concentrations of DM (P = 0.024), ADF (P = 0.012), hemicellulose (P = 0.007), DMD (P = 0.012), TDN (P = 0.012), DE (p = 0.012) and ME (P = 0.012) leaves and the protein content (p = 0.016) of the stem. In general, the application of 30-00-20 fertilizer resulted in lower ADF content in the leaves of Tifton 85 grass and higher DM, with higher energy content also, and providing super N implied lower ADF content and higher DM digestibility of Jiggs grass leaves. In the whole plant, the Jiggs grass had higher NDF (P = 0.017) compared to Tifton 85 grass, however, the concentration of ADF that grass was lower (P < 0.001) than Tifton 85 grass, which resulted in higher DM (P < 0.001) and energy intake (P < 0.001). The application of super N decreased the ADF content (P = 0.026) of grasses, mainly from Jiggs, implying an increase in the digestibility of DM (P = 0.026) and energy content (P = 0.026). Although there are differences between the two grasses, productive and nutritional characteristics make these excellent forage options for the introduction in livestock systems. The supply of NPK 20-10-10 and 08-28-16 formulation is suitable for the cultivation of Tifton 85 and Jiggs grasses by increasing mass production and improve the nutritional quality of the forage. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-06-10 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/15881 10.5433/1679-0359.2015v36n3p1507 |
url |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/15881 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5433/1679-0359.2015v36n3p1507 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/15881/pdf_695 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2015 Semina: Ciências Agrárias http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2015 Semina: Ciências Agrárias http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UEL |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UEL |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Semina: Ciências Agrárias; Vol. 36 No. 3 (2015); 1507-1518 Semina: Ciências Agrárias; v. 36 n. 3 (2015); 1507-1518 1679-0359 1676-546X reponame:Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) instname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) instacron:UEL |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) |
instacron_str |
UEL |
institution |
UEL |
reponame_str |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
collection |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
semina.agrarias@uel.br |
_version_ |
1799306070359801856 |