Evaluation of some forage pea (Pisum arvense L.) lines and cultivars in terms of herbage yield and quality

Year 2019, , 254 - 262, 19.09.2019

Erdal Çaçan , Kağan Kökten , Adil Bakoğlu , Mahmut Kaplan , Ayhan Bozkurt

https://doi.org/10.29050/harranziraat.446423

Cited By: 4

Abstract

This study was conducted to determine some yield, quality attributes and correlation of forage pea lines and cultivars for two years between 2014 and 2015 in Bingöl ecological conditions. In present experiments, fourteen different forage pea lines and cultivars were used as the plant material. Experiments were conducted in randomized complete blocks design with three replications. Plant height, herbage yield, hay yield, crude protein ratio, crude protein yield, crude ash ratio, acid detergent fiber, neutral detergent fiber, digestible dry matter, dry matter intake and relative feed value were investigated. According to mean of experimental years plant height, herbage yield, hay yield, crude protein ratio, crude protein yield, crude ash ratio, acid detergent fiber, neutral detergent fiber, digestible dry matter, dry matter intake and relative feed values varied from 38.4 to 92.0 cm, from 874 to 1552 kg da-1, from 129 to 232 kg da-1, from 10.2 to 16.9%, from 15.8 to 38.4 kg da-1, from 9.1 to 11.6%, from 27.6 to 34.9%, from 38.1 to 44.1%, from 61.7 to 67.4%, from 2.73 to 3.18% and from 130.9 to 166.4. Significant correlations were found between the traits studied. In terms of these parameters; the Urunlu and Retna genotypes were found to be superior.

Keywords

ADF, NDF, Correlation, Crude protein, Forage pea

Bazı yem bezelyesi hat ve çeşitlerinin (Pisum arvense L.) ot verimi ve kalitesi açısından değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Bingöl ekolojik koşullarında bazı yem bezelyesi hat ve çeşitlerinin ot verimi, kalitesi ve aralarındaki korelasyonun belirlenmesi amacıyla 2014-2015 yıllarında iki yıl süreyle yürütülmüştür. Çalışmada materyal olarak 14 adet yem bezelyesi hat ve çeşidi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma tesadüf blokları deneme desenine göre üç tekerrürlü olarak kurulmuştur. Araştırmada; bitki boyu, yeşil ot verimi, kuru ot verimi, ham protein oranı, ham protein verimi, ham kül oranı, asit deterjanda çözünmeyen lif, nötral deterjanda çözünmeyen lif, sindirilebilir kuru madde, kuru madde tüketimi ve nispi yem değerlerine ilişkin veriler ele alınmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda ortalama olarak; bitki boyu 38.4-92.0 cm, yeşil ot verimi 874-1552 kg/da, kuru ot verimi 129-232 kg/da, ham protein oranı %10.2-16.9, ham protein verimi 15.8-38.4 kg/da, ham kül oranı %9.1-11.6, asit deterjanda çözünmeyen lif %27.6-34.9, nötral deterjanda çözünmeyen lif %38.1-44.1, sindirilebilir kuru madde %61.7-67.4, kuru madde tüketimi %2.73-3.18 ve nispi yem değeri 130.9-166.4 arasında değişmiştir. İncelenen özellikler arasında önemli seviyede korelasyon olduğu belirlenmiştir. Bu parametreler açısından; Ürünlü ve Retna genotiplerinin üstün özellikler göstererek öne çıktığı tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

ADF, NDF, Korelasyon, Ham protein, Yem bezelyesi

References

• Acar, Z., Ayan, I., 2012. Culture of Forage Crops. Ondokuz Mayis University, Agriculture Faculty Textbook No:2.
• Acikgoz, E., 2001. Forage Crops. Uludag University, Agriculture Faculty, Department of Field Crops, Uludag University Empowerment Foundation No:182.
• Acikgoz, E., 2013. Forage Crops Breeding. Dairy Livestock Training Center Publications No:8, s.41.
• Anonymous, 2016. Experiments on Measuring Agricultural Values Technical Instruction. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Directorate of Seed Registration and Certification Center, Ankara.
• AOAC, 1990. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official Method of Analysis. 15th.ed. Washington, DC. USA. pp.66-88.
• Asci, O.O., Acar, Z., Arici, Y.K., 2015. Hay Yield, Quality Traits and Interspecies Competition of Forage Pea-Triticale Mixtures Harvested at Different Stages. Turk J Field Crops, 20(2): 166-173.
• Ates, E., 2012. The Mineral, Amino Acid and Fiber Contents and Forage Yield of Field Pea (Pisum arvense L.), Fiddleneck (Phacelia tanacetifolia Benth.) and Their Mixtures under Dry Land Conditions in the Western Turkey. Romanian Agricultural Research, 29: 237-244.
• Avcioglu, R., Hatipoglu, R., Karadag Y., 2009. Leguminous Forage Crops Volume II. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Publications of the General Directorate of Agriculture and Publication.
• Geren, H., Alan, O., 2012. Effects of Different Sowing Dates on The Herbage Yield and Some Other Yield Characteristics of Two Pea (Pisum arvense L.) Cultivars. Anadolu J. of AARI, 22(2): 37-47.
• Gul, I., Sumerli, M., Bicer, B.T., Yilmaz, Y., 2005. Heritability and Correlation Studies in Pea (Pisum arvense L.) Lines. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences, 4(2): 154-158.
• Kalayci, M., 2005. Use JUMP with Examples and Anova Models for Agricultural research. Anatolia Agricultural Research Institute Directorate Publications No:21.
• Karaman, M.R., 2012. Plant Nutrition. Gubretas Guide Book Series:2. Editor: Zengin, M., Basic principles in interpretation of soil and plant analysis results (Chapter 12), page: 874.
• Kavut, Y.T., Celen, A.E, Cibik, S.E., Urtekin, M.A., 2016. A Research on the Yield and Some Yield Characteristics of Some Field Pea (Pisum arvense L.) Varieties Grown In Different Row Spacings in Ege Region Conditions. Journal of Field Crops Central Research Institute, 25(Special issue): 225-229.
• Kocer, A., Albayrak, S., 2012. Determination of Forage Yield and Quality of Pea (Pisum sativum L.) Mixtures with Oat and Barley. Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 17(1): 96-99.
• Morrison, J.A., 2003. Hay and Pasture Management, Chapter 8. Extension Educator, Crop Systems Rockford Extension Center (http://iah.aces.uiuc.edu/pdf/ Agronomy_ HB/ 08chapter.pdf).
• Ozyigit, Y., Bilgen, M., 2006. Effect of Different Cutting Stages on Some Quality Factors in Various Legume Forage Crops. Mediterranean Agricultural Sciences, 19(1): 29-34.
• Sayar, M.S., Anlarsal, A.E., 2008. A Research on Determination of Yield and Some Yield Components of Forage Pea (Pisum arvense L.) Cultivars and Lines in Diyarbakir Ecological Conditions. Cukurova University, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, 17(4): 78-88.
• Sayar, M.S., Anlarsal, A.E, Acikgoz, E., Basbag, M., Gul I., 2009. The Determination of Yield and Yield Components of Some Forage Pea (Pisum arvense L.) Lines in Diyarbakir Conditions. Turkey 8th Congress of Field Crops, 19-22 October, Hatay.
• Sezen, Y., 1995. Fertilizers and Fertilization. Ataturk University Publication No:679, Agriculture Faculty Publications No:303, s.15, Erzurum.
• Tan, M., Koc, A., Dumlu, Z.G., Elkoca, E., Gul, I., 2013. Determination of Dry Matter Yield and Yield Components of Local Forage Pea (Pisum sativum ssp. arvense L.) Ecotypes. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 19(2013): 289-296.
• Timuragaoglu, K.A., Genc, A., Altinok, S., 2004. A Research on Forage and Seed Yields of Forage Pea Lines under Ankara Conditions. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 10(4): 457-461.
• Togay, N., Togay, Y., Erman, M., Yildirim, B., 2006. The Effect of Different Plant Densities on Some Agricultural Properties in Two Winter Pea (Pisum sativum ssp. arvense L.) Lines. J. Agric. Sci., 16(2): 97-103.
• Uzun, A., Gun, H., Acikgoz, E., 2012. Yield and Quality Characteristics of Some Pea (Pisum sativum L.) Varieties Harvested at Different Growing Stages. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Uludag University, 26(1): 27-38.
• Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, J.B., Lewis B.A., 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci., 74: pp.3583-3597.