224 Yield and nutritive values of a polycrop and annual cereal monoculture used in winter swath grazing
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract This 3-yr study evaluated a comparative biomass yield and nutritive values of 2 forage systems: 1) a cereal monoculture (CDC-SO1 oats) and 2) a polycrops (PC) consisting of oat, brassicas (turnip and rape) and forage pea (4010) harvested at the hard dough (HD) stage for winter swath grazing purpose. A 12-ha field was divided into six, 2-ha paddocks, where each paddock was randomly assigned to 1 of 2 replicated (n = 3) forage systems. Forages were seeded in June and sampled for biomass yield and nutritive value at the soft dough (SD) and HD stages of oats. The seeding rate of oat monoculture (OM) was 157 kg/ha, while the PC was 45 kg/ha (oat), 11 kg/ha (forage pea) and 6 kg/ha (brassica). Forage samples were collected from a 0.6 m2 area at 24 pre-selected GPS points (4 per paddock), weighed and then oven-dried to a constant weight to determine DM yield. Data were analyzed using the PROC MIXED procedure of SAS and included treatment effects and treatments × stage interactions. Year was treated as a random effect due to climatic variations across years. For OM, there was a significant difference (P = 0.03) in biomass yield between SD (7,762.7 ± 1,217.9 kg/ha) and HD (8,902.8 ± 1,217.9 kg/ha) stages, while PC biomass yield did not differ (P = 0.94) between SD (5,922.4 ± 1,217.9 kg/ha) and HD (6,163.1±1,217.9 kg/ha) stages. The biomass yields between the two forage systems were different (P < 0.05) at the SD and HD stages. Crude protein (CP) concentration did not differ (P > 0.05) between the OM and PC at SD (10.4 vs 10.3%) and HD (8.9 vs 9.6%) stages. At the SD stage, significant differences (P < 0.05) between OM and the PC were observed for neutral detergent fiber (NDF, 50.9 vs 44.1%), calcium (0.2 vs 0.5%), phosphorus (0.2 vs 0.3%), and RFV-relative feed value (120.3 vs 142.2). Similarly, the starch (20.9 vs 16.5%), calcium (0.2 vs 0.5%), and phosphorus (0.2 vs 0.3%) values for OM and PC, respectively, also differed (P < 0.05) at the HD stage. Differences (P < 0.05) were observed between the SD and HD stages of OM for acid detergent fiber (ADF, 30.1 vs 27.0%), total digestible nutrient (TDN, 65.4 vs 67.9%), and starch (14.9 vs 20.9%) content, respectively. Study results suggest that swathing OM at the HD stage would be beneficial in terms of greater biomass yield without compromising quality, while PC can be harvested at either SD or HD stages based on the annual cereal component. Also, the lack of significant difference in the RFV, CP and TDN values between the PC and OM at the HD stage suggests that PC could be a viable alternative forage system for winter swath grazing.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».