划区轮牧对放牧型紫花苜蓿人工草地产量与品质的影响

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2022.09.029

草地学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (9): 2477-2482.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2022.09.029

划区轮牧对放牧型紫花苜蓿人工草地产量与品质的影响

王瑜, 代先林, 马晓颖, 韦宝, 何峰, 李向林, 仝宗永

中国农业科学院北京畜牧兽医研究所, 北京 100193

收稿日期:2022-03-02 修回日期:2022-04-02 出版日期:2022-09-15 发布日期:2022-09-30
通讯作者: 何峰,E-mail:hefeng@caas.cn
作者简介:王瑜(1981-),女,汉族,山东威海人,助理研究员,主要从事牧草种质资源与草地管理研究,E-mail:yuwang-99@hotmail.com
基金资助:
内蒙古自治区科技计划项目放牧型混播人工草地承载力及家畜配置研究与示范（2021GG0220）；中国农业科学院科技创新工程（ASTIP-IAS14）；财政部和农业农村部国家现代农业产业技术体系（CARS-34）资助

Yield and Quality Changes of Alfalfa in Response to Rotationally Grazing

WANG Yu, DAI Xian-lin, MA Xiao-ying, WEI Bao, HE Feng, LI Xiang-lin, TONG Zong-yong

Institute of Animal Sciences of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China

Received:2022-03-02 Revised:2022-04-02 Online:2022-09-15 Published:2022-09-30

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为探究划区轮牧对放牧型紫花苜蓿（Medicago sativa L.）人工草地产量与品质的影响，本研究开展周期为36 d的6个小区划区轮牧试验，通过对在牧期和牧后再生期紫花苜蓿地上生物量与粗蛋白、粗脂肪、粗灰分、中性洗涤纤维、酸性洗涤纤维指标含量的测定，研究在牧期和牧后再生期紫花苜蓿产量与品质的变化规律，以期为轮牧制度的合理制定提供依据。结果表明：7—8月进行划区轮牧时，在牧期紫花苜蓿的产量和品质均随放牧时间的延长而降低，根据地上生物量和粗蛋白含量的降低量计算出苜蓿草地平均每天为每只羊提供的干物质和粗蛋白量分别为1.65 kg和318 g。牧后再生期紫花苜蓿的产量随时间的延长而升高，品质则随时间的延长先升高后降低，在21 d时品质最好，经过30 d的再生，地上生物量可达3.73 t·hm^-2，粗蛋白产量可达0.8 t·hm^-2。另外，由于绵羊采食的选择性，导致仅剩木质化茎秆的残茬对再生初期苜蓿品质的影响较大，建议牧后对残茬进行刈割以提升再生期草品质。

关键词: 紫花苜蓿, 划区轮牧, 产量, 品质

Abstract: An experiment was conducted to study the yield and quality changes of alfalfa in response to rotationally grazing. A 36-day rotation in 6 alfalfa paddocks grazed by lambs was set and a series of indexes during grazing and post-grazing regrowth period were determined respectively, which included the aboveground biomass, the content of crude protein, ether extract, ash, neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber. The results showed that the yield and quality of alfalfa decreased gradually with increasing the duration of grazing in July and August. According to the decrease amount of aboveground biomass and CP content, an average of 1.65 kg dry matter and 318 g CP were provided to each lamb per day by alfalfa pasture. The yield of alfalfa increased with the endurance of alfalfa regrowth, while the quality of alfalfa increased initially and then decreased gradually. The quality reached the peak at 21 d. After a 30-day of regrowth, the aboveground biomass and the yield of crude protein reached 3.73 t·hm^-2 and 0.8 t·hm^-2, respectively. In addition, the stubble with only lignified stems caused by the selective feeding of sheep had significant influence on the quality of alfalfa in the early regrowth stage, so cutting stubble immediately after grazing was recommended in order to improve the quality of alfalfa.

Key words: Alfalfa, Rotational grazing, Yield, Quality

中图分类号:

S963.22+3.3

王瑜, 代先林, 马晓颖, 韦宝, 何峰, 李向林, 仝宗永. 划区轮牧对放牧型紫花苜蓿人工草地产量与品质的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2477-2482.

WANG Yu, DAI Xian-lin, MA Xiao-ying, WEI Bao, HE Feng, LI Xiang-lin, TONG Zong-yong. Yield and Quality Changes of Alfalfa in Response to Rotationally Grazing[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2022, 30(9): 2477-2482.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2022.09.029

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/CN/Y2022/V30/I9/2477

参考文献

[1] 彩黎干. 放牧型人工草地草畜系统经济分析与优化路径研究[D]. 北京:中国农业科学院, 2021, 17
[2] 刘迎春. 人工草地放牧利用研究现状[J]. 四川草原, 2005, (5):6-9
[3] SU Y Z, LI Y L, CUI J Y, et al. Influences of continuous grazing and livestock exclusion on soil properties in a degraded sandy grassland, Inner Mongolia, northern China[J]. Catena, 2005, 59(3):267-278
[4] SCHÖNBACH P, WAN H, GIERUS M, et al.Andreas Susenbeth, Friedhelm Taube. Grassland responses to grazing:effects of grazing intensity and management system in an Inner Mongolian steppe ecosystem[J]. Plant Soil, 2011, 340(1-2):103-115
[5] DOUGLAS J A. The production and utilization of lucerne in New Zealand[J]. Grass and Forage Science, 1986, 41(2):81-128
[6] FRASER M D, SPEIJERS M H M, THEOBALD V J, et al. Production performance and meat quality of grazing lambs finished on red clover, lucerne or perennial ryegrass swards[J]. Grass and Forage Science, 2004, 59(4):345-356
[7] BOUTON J H. Breeding lucerne for persistence[J]. Crop & Pasture Science, 2012, 63(2):95-106
[8] PAPADOPOULOS Y A, MCKENZIE D B, MCRAE K B, et al. Charmley. Evaluating the performance of alfalfa cultivars in rotationally grazed pastures[J]. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 2005, 85(1):147-150
[9] MOOT D J, BENNETT S M, MILLS A M, et al. Optimal grazing management to achieve high yields and utilization of dryland lucerne[J]. Journal of New Zealand Grasslands, 2017(78):27-34
[10] 戎郁萍, 历卫宏, 赵来喜, 等. 苜蓿放牧地生产性能与管理[J]. 草地学报, 2007, 15(2):180-186
[11] 何峰, 李向林, 仝宗永, 等. 基于紫花苜蓿混播草地的全草型肉羊放牧育肥模式案例研究[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(1):273-278
[12] TEIXEIRA E I, MOOT D J, MICKELBART M V. Seasonal patterns of root C and N reserves of Lucerne crops (Medicago sativa L.) grown in a temperate climate were affected by defoliation regime[J]. European Journal of Agronomy, 2007, 26(1):10-20
[13] National Research Council. Nutrient Requirements of Small Ruminants:Sheep, Goats, Cervids, and New World Camelids[M]. Washington, D C:The National Academies Press, 2007:244
[14] 中国农业科学院北京畜牧兽医研究所, 内蒙古畜牧科学院. NY/T 816-2004肉羊饲养标准[S]. 北京:中华人民共和国农业行业标准, 2004:1-31
[15] MOOT D J, SMITH M C, MILLS A. Liveweight production, dry matter yield and seasonal composition from dryland lucerne and lucerne/grass mixes over five years[J]. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 2020, 63(3):272-300
[16] WOODMAN H E, EVANS R E. Nutritive value of lucerne. IV. The leaf stem ratio[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science, 1935, 25(4):578-597
[17] FLETCHER L R. Effect of season and regrowth period on the in vitro digestibility of irrigated Lucerne in Canterbury[J]. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 1976, 4(4):469-471
[18] ALLISON R M, VARTHA E W. Yields of protein extracted from irrigated lucerne[J]. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 1973, 1(1):35-38
[19] LEMAIRE G, KHAITY M, ONILLON B, et al. Dynamics of accumulation and partitioning of N in leaves, stems and roots of Lucerne (Medicago sativa L.) in a dense canopy[J]. Annals of Botany, 1992, 70(5):429-435

划区轮牧对放牧型紫花苜蓿人工草地产量与品质的影响

Yield and Quality Changes of Alfalfa in Response to Rotationally Grazing

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	徐小博, 王鑫尧, 郁伟杰, 苗一凡, 徐博. 紫花苜蓿MsJMT基因的克隆及其与育性的关联分析[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2306-2314.
[2]	郑荣佳, 孔维一, 冯嘉欣, 郑轶琦, 叶刚, 沈泽宇, 刘建秀, 郭海林. 结缕草属植物表型多样性分析及优异种质筛选[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2325-2335.
[3]	孟翔, 孙伶俐, 谢开云, 刘伟, 褚皓清, 赵越. 灌溉、施磷量及AM真菌对紫花苜蓿产量和水磷利用效率的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2356-2364.
[4]	范燕闯, 王俊锋, 高嵩, 李志坚. 芽菜收获对松嫩盐碱化紫花苜蓿草地综合收益的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2460-2468.
[5]	郝俊峰, 于浩然, 贾玉山, 王志军, 格根图, 李宇宇, 孙林. 青贮密度和青贮时间对紫花苜蓿发酵品质及营养成分的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2492-2496.
[6]	刘彦培, 薛世明, 钟绍丽, 刘云松, 蔡明, 侯洁琼, 张博琰, 匡崇义, 徐驰, 高月娥, 吴梦霞, 张美艳. 滇西北高海拔地区小黑麦与饲用豌豆混播草地综合评价[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2497-2504.
[7]	王琴, 李小云, 王旭成, 宋文学, 王星, 王晶, 李满有, 高雪芹, 伏兵哲. 宁夏干旱区行距与播量对无芒雀麦种子产量和质量的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2505-2513.
[8]	何纪桐, 马祥, 琚泽亮, 刘凯强, 赵继秀, 马小龙, 贾志锋. 高寒地区燕麦与蚕豆间作对作物生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2514-2521.
[9]	张佳伟, 贾玉山, 格根图, 王志军, 包健, 李宇宇, 彭冬, 王宇, 孙鹏波, 岳晓明. 不同丙酸浓度对天然牧草青贮品质及有氧稳定性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(9): 2522-2528.
[10]	王勃, 王聪聪, 夏方山, 陈奕霖, 赵萍, 朱慧森. 硒引发对不同品种紫花苜蓿种子抗氧化特性的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(8): 2037-2044.
[11]	张辉辉, 师尚礼, 武蓓, 李自立, 李小龙, 吴芳, 康文娟, 陈新栋. 紫花苜蓿与不同生活型多年生禾本科牧草混播生长生理特征[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(8): 2144-2157.
[12]	李军, 杜俊颖, 杨莉, 宋连昭, 李鑫洋, 薛祝林, 刘贵河. 冀西北地区错期交叉混播对第3年草地生产力的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(8): 2167-2172.
[13]	徐洪雨, 李钰莹. 基于KEGG通路分析紫花苜蓿的冷适应过程[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(7): 1721-1730.
[14]	王腾飞, 常怡然, 邓雪, 沈笑天, 王斌, 李满有, 倪旺, 兰剑. 饲用燕麦品种在宁夏雨养区的适应性评价[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(7): 1755-1762.
[15]	杨孝奎, 郇树乾, 黄冬芬, 郇恒福, 刘国道, 胡安, 刘许霖. 40份不同种质资源山蚂蝗有机肥品质评价[J]. 草地学报, 2022, 30(7): 1763-1772.