Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

  • 제22권6호
  • /
  • Pages.836-842
  • /
  • 2009
  • /
  • 1011-2367(pISSN)
  • /
  • 1976-5517(eISSN)
아세아태평양축산학회 (Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Potential Benefits of Intercropping Corn with Runner Bean for Small-sized Farming System

  • Bildirici, N. (Collage of Gevas, University of Yuzuncu Yil) ;
  • Aldemir, R. (Collage of Gevas, University of Yuzuncu Yil) ;
  • Karsli, M.A. (Department of Animal Nutrition, Veterinary Faculty of University of Yuzuncu Yil) ;
  • Dogan, Y. (Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Yuzuncu Yil)
  • 투고 : 2008.12.04
  • 심사 : 2009.02.23
  • 발행 : 2009.06.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The objectives of this study were to evaluate potential benefits of intercropping of corn with runner bean for a smallsized farming system, based on land equivalent ratio (LER) and silage yield and quality of corn intercropped with runner bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), in arid conditions of Turkey under an irrigation system. This experiment was established as a split-plot design in a randomized complete block, with three replications and carried out over two (consecutive) years in 2006 and 2007. Seven different mixtures (runner bean, B and silage corn sole crop, C, 10% B+90% C, 20% B+80% C, 30% B+70% C, 40% B+60%C, and 50% B+50%C) of silage corn-runner bean were intercropped. All of the mixtures were grown under irrigation. The corn-runner bean fields were planted in the second week of May and harvested in the first week of September in both years. Green beans were harvested three times each year and green bean yields were recorded each time. After the 3rd harvest of green bean, residues of bean and corn together were randomly harvested from a 1 $m^{2}$ area by hand using a clipper when the bean started to dry and corn was at the dough stage. Green mass yields of each plot were recorded. Silages were prepared from each plot (triplicate) in 1 L mini-silos. After 60 d ensiling, subsamples were taken from this material for determination of dry matter (DM), pH, organic acids, chemical composition, and in vitro DM digestibility of silages. The LER index was also calculated to evaluate intercrop efficiencies with respect to sole crops. Average pH, acetic, propionic and butyric acid concentrations were similar but lactic acid and ammonia-N levels were significantly different (p<0.05) among different mixtures of bean intercropped with corn. Ammonia-N levels linearly increased from 0.90% to 2.218 as the percentage of bean increased in the mixtures up to a 50:50 seeding ratio. While average CP content increased linearly from 6.47 to 12.45%, and average NDF and ADF contents decreased linearly from 56.17 to 44.88 and from 34.92 to 33.51%, respectively, (p<0.05) as the percentage of bean increased in the mixtures up to a 50:50 seeding ratio, but DM and OM contents did not differ among different mixtures of bean intercropped with corn (p>0.05). In vitro OM digestibility values differed significantly among bean-corn mixture silages (p<0.05). Fresh bean, herbage DM, IVOMD, ME yields, and LER index were significantly influenced by percentage of bean in the mixtures (p<0.01). As the percentage of bean increased in the mixtures up to a 50:50 seeding ratio, yields of fresh bean (from 0 to 24,380 kg/ha) and CP (from 1,258.0 to 1,563.0 kg/ha) and LER values (from 1.0 to 1.775) linearly increased, but yields of herbage DM (from 19,670 to 12,550 kg/ha), IVOMD (from 12,790 to 8,020 kg/ha) and ME (46,230 to 29,000 Mcal/ha) yields decreased (p<0.05). In conclusion, all of the bean-corn mixtures provided a good silage and better CP concentrations. Even though forage yields decreased, the LER index linearly increased as the percentage of bean increased in the mixture up to a 50:50 seeding ratio, which indicates a greater utilization of land. Therefore, a 50:50 seeding ratio seemed to be best for optimal utilization of land in this study and to provide greater financial stability for labor-intensive, small farmers.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Adetunji, M. T. 1996. Nitrogen utilization by maize in a maizecowpea sefuential cropping of an intensively cultivated tropical Ultisol. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 44(1):85-88
  2. Adetunji, M. T. 1996. Nitrogen utilization by maize in a maizecowpea sefuential cropping of an intensively cultivated tropical Ultisol. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 44(1):85-88
  3. Anil, L. and R. H. Phipps. 1998. Temperate intercropping of cereals for forage: a review of the potential for growth and utilization with particular reference to the UK. Grass Forage Sci. 53:301-164 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2494.1998.00144.x
  4. Anil, L., J. Park and R. H. Phipps. 2000. The potential of foragemaize intercrops in ruminant nutrition. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 86:157-164 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(00)00176-0
  5. Al-Masri, M. R. 1998. Yield and nutritive value of vetch (Vicia sativa) -barley (Hordeum vulgare) forage under different harvesting regimens. Tropical Grasslands 32:201-206
  6. Armstrong, K., K. Albrecht, J. Lauer and H. Riday. 2005: Intercropping climbing beans with corn for silage. American Forage and Grassland Council Conference Proceedings
  7. AOAC. 1990. Official Methods of Analysis, 15th edn. Association Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC
  8. Ciftci, V. and M. Ulker. 2005. Effect of mixed cropping lentil with wheat and barley at different seeding ratios. J. Argon. 4(1):1-4 https://doi.org/10.3923/ja.2005.1.4
  9. Ciftci, V., N. Togay, Y. Togay and Y. Dogan. 2006. The effects of intercropping sowing systems with dry bean and maize on yield and some yield components. J. Agron. 5(1):53-56 https://doi.org/10.3923/ja.2006.53.56
  10. Drury, C. F. and C. S. Tan. 1995. Long-term (35 years) effects offertilization, rotation and weather on corn yields. Can. J. Plant Sci. 75(2):355-362 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00359-0
  11. Ergun, A. and S. D. Tuncer. 2001. Hayvan Besleme ve Beslenme Hastaliklarn, Medipress, Ankara
  12. Ergun, A., S. D. Tuncer, I. Colpan, S. Yalcin, G. Yidiz, K. Kucukersan, S. Kucukersan and A. Sehu. 2002. Yemler, Yem Hijyeni ve Teknolojisi, A.U. Veteriner Fak. Hayvan Besleme ve Beslenme Hastaliklarn Anabilim Dali, Ankara
  13. Goering, H. K. and P. J. Van Soest. 1970. Forage fiber analyses. Apparatus, reagent, procedures and applications. USDA Agric. Handbook No. 379
  14. Karadag, Y. 2004. Forage yields, seed yields and botanical compositions of some legume-barley mixtures under rainfed condition in semi-arid regions of Turkey. Asain J. Plant Sci. 3(3):295-299 https://doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2004.295.299
  15. Leventini, M. W., C. W. Hunt, R. E. Roffler and D. G. Casebolt. 1990. Effects of dietary levels of barley-based supplements and ruminal buffer on digestion and growth by beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 68:4334-4344
  16. Lithourgidis, A. S., I. B. Vasilakoglou, K. V. Dhima, C. A. Dordas and M. D. Yiakoulaki. 2006. Forage yield and quality of common vetch mixtures with oat and triticale in two seeding ratios. Field Crops Research 99(1-2):106-113 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2006.07.008
  17. Marten, G. C. and R. F. Barnes. 1980. Prediction of energy digestibility of forages with in vitro rumen fermentation and fungal enzyme systems. In: Proc. Int. Workshop on Standardization of Analytical Methodology for Feed (Ed. W. J. Pigden, C. C. Balch and M. Graham). Int. Dev. Res. Center, Ottawa, Canada
  18. Minson, D. J. and J. R. Wilson. 1994. Prediction of intake as element of forage quality. In: Forage Quality, Evaluation, and Utilization (Ed. G. C. Fahey, Jr.). pp. 533-563
  19. American Society of Agronomy, Inc. Crop Science Society of America, Inc. Soil Science Society of America, Inc. Madison, WI
  20. NRC. 1989. Nutrient requirements of beef dairy (7th Ed.), National Academy Press, Washington, DC
  21. Polan, C. E., D. Stieve and J. C. Garret. 1998. Protein preservation and ruminal degradation of ensiled forage treated with heat, formic acid, ammonia or microbial innoculant. J. Dairy Sci. 81:765-776 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(98)75633-4
  22. Qamar, I. A., J. D. H. Keatinge, N. Mohammad, A. Ali and M. A. Khan. 1999. Introduction and management of common vetch/barley forage mixtures in the rainfed areas of Pakistan. 2. Forage quality. Aust. J. Agr. Res. 50:11-20 https://doi.org/10.1071/A98042
  23. Ross, S, M., J. R. King, J. T. O'Donovan and D. Spaner. 2004. Forage potential of intercropping berseem clover with barley, oat, or triticale. Argon. J. 96:1013-1020 https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2004.1013
  24. SAS User's Guide. 1985. Statistics, Version 5 ed. SAS inst., Inc., Cary, NC
  25. Smith, B. W. 1990. Feed Industry Red Book. Communications Marketing, Inc., MN
  26. Temu, A. E. M. and J. B. Aune. 1995. Effect of green manuring and rotation on maize yield in the Southern Highlands of Tanzania. Nor. J. Agri. Sci. (Suppl.) 21:93-98
  27. Tilley, J. M. A. and R. A. Terry. 1963. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. J. Br. Grassl. Soc. 18:104-111 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x
  28. Tsubo, M. and S. Walker. 2004. Shade effects on Phaseolus vulgaris L. İntercropped with Zea mays L. Under well-watered conditions. J. Agron. Crop. Sci. 190:168-176 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.2004.00089.x
  29. Tuna, C. and A. Orak. 2007. The role of intercropping on yield potential pf common vetch (Vicia sativa L.)/oat (Avena sativa L.) cultivated in pure stand and mixtures. J. Agric. Biol. Sci. 2:14-19
  30. Valdez, F. R., J. H. Harrison and S. C. Fransen. 1988. Effect of feeding corn-sunflower silage on milk production, milk composition and rumen fermentation of lactating cow. J. Dairy Sci. 71:2462-2469 https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(88)79832-X
  31. Van Soest, P. J. and J. B. Robertson. 1979. Systems of analyses for evaluation of fibrous feed. In: Proc. Int. Workshop on Standardization of Analytical Methodology for Feeds (Ed. W. J. Pigden, C. C. Balch and M. Graham). pp. 49-60. Int. Dev. Res. Center, Ottowa, Canada
  32. Widodo, M. E., R. de Jong and H. M. J. Udo. 1994. Small scale dairying in three farming systems in East Java I. Farmer's income and houshold characteristic. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 7:19-29