Evaluation of the Production Performance of 5 Tall Fescue cultivars in Hilly Area of Central Sichuan Basin

doi:10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2018.01.012

Acta Agrestia Sinica ›› 2018, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (1): 99-104.DOI: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2018.01.012

Previous Articles Next Articles

Evaluation of the Production Performance of 5 Tall Fescue cultivars in Hilly Area of Central Sichuan Basin

ZHANG Fan, LI Xiao-mei, SONG Xin, ZHANG Dong, GUAN Hao, ZHANG Xin-quan, YAN Yan-hong

Department of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, Sichuan Provience 611130, China

Received:2017-06-06 Revised:2018-03-20 Online:2018-02-15 Published:2018-05-25

5个苇状羊茅品种在川中丘陵地区生产性能综合评价

张帆, 李小梅, 宋鑫, 张东, 关皓, 张新全, 闫艳红

四川农业大学动物科技学院草业科学系, 四川成都 611130

通讯作者: 闫艳红
作者简介:张帆(1991-),女,四川成都人,在读硕士,主要从事饲草栽培生理方面研究,E-mail:289317131@qq.com
基金资助:
四川省科技厅应用基础重点项目（2016JY0031）和国家自然科学基金面上项目（31271668）资助

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to screen out suitable tall festuca varieties for planting in hilly areas of central Sichuan Province, the field experiments were conducted to compare the production performance of 5 tall festuca cultivars in Hesha Town and Tianbao Town of Suining City. The results showed that the growth rate and hay yield of ‘Kerui’ were the highest (P<0.05) in the two test sites ,which were 0.564 cm·d^-1 and 8 842 kg·hm^-2, respectively, followed by ‘Martin’ and ‘Jingang’. In addition, the production of crude protein and water soluble carbohydrates were the highest in ‘Kerui’ with 1 345 kg·hm^-2 and 887 kg·hm^-2, respectively, followed by ‘Meishijia’ and ‘Jingang’. Whereas, the production of neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber of ‘Meishijia’ and ‘Kerui’ were the lowest (P<0.05), and there were no significant difference between these two cultivars. In summary, ‘Kerui’, ‘Meishijia’ and ‘Jingang’ had the higher hay yield and nutritional quality, which could be popularized and have better application value in this area.

Key words: Tall fescue, Yield, Nutrient content

摘要：

在川中丘陵地区遂宁市河沙镇和天保镇，对5个苇状羊茅（Festuca arundinace Schreb.）品种进行牧草生产性能的比较研究，旨在筛选出适宜在该区种植的品种。结果表明，‘科瑞’在两个试点的生长速度和干草总产量均最高，分别为0.564 cm·d^-1和8 842 kg·hm^-2，显著高于其它品种（P<0.05），其次为‘金刚’和‘马丁’。粗蛋白和可溶性碳水化合物产量均以‘科瑞’最高，分别为1 345 kg·hm^-2和887 kg·hm^-2，均显著高于其它品种（P<0.05），其次为‘美食家’和‘金刚’；中性洗涤纤维和酸性洗涤纤维产量均以‘美食家’和‘科瑞’最低，二者无显著性差异。综上所述，‘科瑞’、‘美食家’和‘金刚’的干草产量较高，营养品质较好，在川中丘陵区具有较好的推广价值。

关键词: 苇状羊茅, 产量, 营养成分

CLC Number:

S543.9

ZHANG Fan, LI Xiao-mei, SONG Xin, ZHANG Dong, GUAN Hao, ZHANG Xin-quan, YAN Yan-hong. Evaluation of the Production Performance of 5 Tall Fescue cultivars in Hilly Area of Central Sichuan Basin[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2018, 26(1): 99-104.

张帆, 李小梅, 宋鑫, 张东, 关皓, 张新全, 闫艳红. 5个苇状羊茅品种在川中丘陵地区生产性能综合评价[J]. 草地学报, 2018, 26(1): 99-104.

0
/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2018.01.012

https://manu40.magtech.com.cn/Jweb_cdxb/EN/Y2018/V26/I1/99

References

[1] 陈文品,刘大钧. 苇状羊茅的染色体组分析[J]. 草业科学,1989,(04):24-32
[2] 武菊英,江国铿,贾春虹. 高羊茅苗期对除草剂耐药性的研究[J]. 草业科学,1997,(02):55-58
[3] 李敏. 苇状羊茅品种比较试验[J]. 草业科学,1993,(06):49-53
[4] 鲁静容. 四川丘陵区土地利用结构优化研究[D]. 成都:四川农业大学,2003:6-15
[5] 伍冠锁,陈月凤,童晓利. 我国丘陵地区发展现代农业的思考[J]. 金陵科技学院学报,2007,(04):56-58
[6] 黄体元. 四川丘陵地区现代农业发展的思考[J]. 四川农业科技,2013,(08):7-9
[7] 崔国文. 中国牧草育种工作的发展、现状与任务[J]. 草业科学,2008,(01):38-42
[8] 李发玉,张新全,刘学福,等. 苇状羊茅种子生产技术研究进展[J]. 四川草原,2004,(03):32-34
[9] 周芝昕,杨明海,陈晋国,等. 苇状羊茅引种试验报告[J]. 草业科学,1989,(01):33-35
[10] 郭孝,张莉. 苇状羊茅生产性能的综合研究[J]. 草业科学,1998,(4):24-26
[11] 骆东奇,周心琴,邱继勤. 统筹城乡旅游发展意义与对策分析-以重庆市为例[J]. 重庆工商大学学报(西部论坛),2007,06:26-29
[12] 甘肃农业大学草原系. 草原学与牧草学实习实验指导书[M]. 兰州:甘肃科学技术出版社,1991:136-144
[13] 张丽英. 饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M]. 北京:中国农业大学出版社,2003:46-55
[14] 兰英,牟琼,范彦,等. 不同品种鸭茅在渝西地区生态适应性评价[J]. 黑龙江畜牧兽医,2010,(21):87-89
[15] 王力生,齐永玲,陈芳,等. 不同添加剂对笋壳青贮品质和营养价值的影响[J]. 草业学报,2013,05:326-332
[16] 于杰,郑琛,李发弟,等. 向日葵秸秆与全株玉米混合青贮饲料品质评定[J]. 草业学报,2013,(05):198-204
[17] Owens V N,Albrecht K A,Muck R E,et al. Protein degra-dation and fermentation characteristics of red clover and alfalfa silage harvested with varying levels of total nonseructurl car-bohydrate[J]. Crop Science,1999,39(6):1873-1880
[18] SAS. SAS/STAT user's guide:version 6[M]. 4th ed.Cary,North Carolina:SAS Institute Inc,1984
[19] 刘玉华. 紫花苜蓿生长发育及产量形成与气象条件关系的研究[D]. 西安:西北农林科技大学,2006:56-62
[20] 师尚礼,李锦华. 羊茅属两种牧草生态适应性及其栽培技术[J]. 草地学报,2006,(01):39-42
[21] 蔡晓华. 苇状羊茅在安康地区的生长适应性观察[J]. 安徽农业科学,2008,(17):7225-7226
[22] 刘玉红,肖飚,袁昌定. 红池坝牧草引种试验研究[J]. 草地学报,1997,(02):133-140
[23] 李冬梅,田新会,杜文华. 小黑麦新品系的草产量及营养价值研究[J]. 草地学报,2016,24(06):1164-1169
[24] 祁娟,闫伟红,徐长林,等. 披碱草属野生种质材料在干旱与半干旱区适应性评价[J]. 中国草地学报,2013,(04):40-46
[25] 康俊梅,杨青川,郭文山,等. 北京地区10个紫花苜蓿引进品种的生产性能研究[J]. 中国草地学报,2010,(06):5-10
[26] 郭海明,于磊,林祥群. 新疆北疆绿洲区4个紫花苜蓿品种生产性能比较[J]. 草业科学,2009,(07):72-76
[27] 孙万斌. 不同生境下20个紫花苜蓿品种的综合评价及不同生育期营养特性的比较[D]. 兰州:甘肃农业大学,2016:12-13
[28] 杨盛婷,钟鸣,班骞,等. 3个鸭茅品种(系)在雅安的品种比较试验[J]. 草业科学,2016,(03):471-478
[29] 衣兰智,李长忠,刘洪庆,等. 不同苜蓿品种在青岛地区的适应性[J]. 草业学报,2011:20(2):147-155
[30] 刘正书,赵明坤,罗绍薇. 优良牧草皇草的营养动态研究[J]. 贵州农业科学,1997,(05):38-41
[31] 刘琳,钟红银,杨春华,等. 不同刈割时期和强度对改良草地老芒麦产量、品质及再生植株生殖特征的影响[J]. 草地学报,2017,25(05):1131-1137
[32] 易显凤,赖志强,吴佳海. 苇状羊茅在广西的适应性试验报告[J]. 热带农业科学,2008,(04):47-49

Evaluation of the Production Performance of 5 Tall Fescue cultivars in Hilly Area of Central Sichuan Basin

5个苇状羊茅品种在川中丘陵地区生产性能综合评价

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	YANG Chong, WANG Wen-ying, LIU Pan, MAO Xu-feng, DONG Shi-kui, ZHOU Hua-kun, CHEN Zhe, SUONANJi, JIN Lei, MA Hua-qing. Characteristics of Nutrient Contents and Evaluation of Nutritional Value of the Alpine Grassland Plants in the Source Area of the Yellow River [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(S1): 72-79.
[2]	LAN Xiang-yu, YE Chong-chong, WANG Yi, ZENG Tao, SUN Jian. Spatiotemporal Variation Characteristics and Its Driving Forces of Water Conservation Function on the Tibetan Plateau from 1995 to 2014 [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(S1): 80-92.
[3]	LU Jia-ding, YANG Xu, ZHU Xiao-yan, CUI Ya-lei, WANG Cheng-zhang, LI De-feng, SHI Ying-hua. Comprehensive Evaluation of 21 Corn Silage Varieties with both Grain and Forage in Henan Province [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 1950-1958.
[4]	WU Hai-yan, QU Zhen, LIU Zhao-ming, LABA Dun-zhu, TONGSANG Cuo-mu, QU Ni, NIMA zhuo-ga, MA Yu-shou. Comparative study on Production Performance of Oat Varieties Based on Principal Component Analysis [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 1967-1973.
[5]	MENG Xuan-chen, MA Peng-cheng, MA Jie, DUAN Zhen, HAN Yang-yang, ZHANG Ji-yu. Study on the Effect of Mulching Furrow and Fertilization of Alfalfa in Semi-arid Areas of Loess Plateau [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(9): 2098-2106.
[6]	HE Zhen-fu, HE Chun-gui, WANG Fei, CHEN Ping. Analysis of Production Performance and Quality of Different Types of Forage Sorghum [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1446-1453.
[7]	ZHANG Feng, ZHAO Tian-qi, QIAO Ji-rong, ZHAO Meng-li, ZHANG Xin-yue, WU Jian-xin. Effects of Stubble Height on productivity and Sustainable Utilization in the Stipa grandis Steppe [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1491-1498.
[8]	FU Zhi-hui, GE Gen-tu, JIA Yu-shan, WANG Zhi-jun, LYU Shi-jie, HOU Mei-ling, NAN Ding-han, YI Ru-le, A Xi-da, JIN Guo. Effects of Cutting Times and Varieties on the Yield and Nutrient Value of Italian Ryegrass Planted in Northern Regions [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1571-1577.
[9]	DONG Zhi-xiao, HE Run-hao, KUANG Jian-yang, NIE Cong, YANG Jian, ZHANG Jian-bo, GOU Wen-long, MA Xiao. Effects of Sweet Sorghum Intercropping with Lablab Purpureus on Yield and Quality of Mixed Forage in Chengdu Plain,China [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(7): 1578-1583.
[10]	HAN Xue-qin, DENG Hong-shan, PU Tian-lei, LUO Hui-ying, ZHAO Qiong-ling, LIAO Cheng-fei, XUE Shi-ming, FAN Jian-cheng, JIN Jie. The Study on Agronomic Characters of Silage Maize Varieties in Dry-hot Valley Region of Jinsha River [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(6): 1327-1335.
[11]	LI Wen, MA Lin-feng, CAO Xi-min, YU Feng-fang, SHE Zhi-hui, XU Zhan-yun, LIU Gui-he, LYU Ai-zhi. Effect of Sowing Date on Yield and Quality of Zea mays L. in Bashang Agro-pastoral Ecotone in Northwest Hebei Province [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(5): 1080-1086.
[12]	NIE Cong, YANG Xiao-peng, LIU Zhe-chuan, ZHAO Yu-han, CHEN Wan-ting, HE Run-hao, LIU Wei, GOU Wen-long, MA Xiao. Effects of Different Preceding Combination and Planting Density on Production Performance and Quality of Forage Corn [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(4): 709-716.
[13]	LI Wen-jing, WANG Jun-feng, GAO Xiao-di, SHI Yu-jie, MU Chun-sheng. Effects of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Addition on the Hay Yield and Quality of Leymus chinensis Under Drought Conditions [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(4): 743-748.
[14]	CHEN Li-qiang, BAI Xiao-ming. Changes of Seed Structure,Yield and Quality of Melilotus dentatus During the Ripening Process [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(3): 465-471.
[15]	WANG Wei-qiang, LIU Jing, TIAN Xin-hui, DU Wen-hua. Adaptability Evaluation of Secale cereale ‘Gannong No.2’ in Different Regions of Qinghai Province [J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2021, 29(3): 504-514.