| Literature DB >> 26672990 |
Jie Zhang1, Binjie Yin1, Yuhuai Xie1, Jing Li2, Zaibin Yang1, Guiguo Zhang1,2.
Abstract
Intercropping legume with cereal is an extensively applied planting pattern in crop cultivation. However, forage potential and the degradability of harvested mixtures from intercropping system remain unclear. To investigate the feasibility of applying an intercropping system as a forage supply source to ruminants, two consecutive experiments (experiments 1 and 2) involving a field cultivation trial and a subsequent in vivo degradable experiment were conducted to determine the forage production performance and the ruminally degradable characteristics of a harvested mixture from an alfalfa/corn-rye intercropping system. In experiment 1, the intercropping system was established by alternating alfalfa and corn or rye with a row ratio of 5:2. Dry matter (DM) and nutrient yields were determined. In experiment 2, forages harvested from the different treatments were used as feedstuff to identify nutrient degradation kinetics and distribution of components between the rapidly degradable (a), potentially degradable (b) and the degradation rate constant (c) of 'b' fraction by in sacco method in Small-Tail Han wether Sheep. The intercropping system of alfalfa and corn-rye provided higher forage production performance with net increases of 9.52% and 34.81% in DM yield, 42.13% and 16.74% in crude protein (CP) yield, 25.94% and 69.99% in degradable DM yield, and 16.96% and 5.50% in degradable CP yield than rotation and alfalfa sole cropping systems, respectively. In addition, the harvest mixture from intercropping system also had greater 'a' fraction, 'b' fraction, 'c' values, and effective degradability (E value) of DM and CP than corn or rye hay harvested from rotation system. After 48-h exposure to rumen microbes, intercropping harvest materials were degraded to a higher extent than separately degraded crop stems from the sole system as indicated by visual microscopic examination with more tissues disappeared. Thus, the intercropping of alfalfa and corn-rye exhibited a greater forage production potential, and could be applied as forage supply source for ruminants. The improved effective degradability of harvest mixture material could be attributed to greater degradable components involving the rapidly degradable fractions (a), potentially degradable (b) fractions, and degradable rate constant (c), than that of corn and rye hay.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26672990 PMCID: PMC4687681 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0144813
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Diagram of different intercropping patterns between alfalfa (A, *), corn (C, +) and rye (R, +). Distances between rows (cm) are indicated.
Weather conditions for the duration of the experiment.
| Item | Months | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ||
| 2012 (year) | |||||||||||||
| Rainfall (mm/month) | 6.5 | 8.6 | 18.2 | 25.8 | 44.2 | 90.6 | 218.2 | 157.7 | 67.4 | 35.3 | 18.4 | 9.2 | |
| Air temperature (°C) | Mean minimum | -7.4 | 5.2 | 1 | 7.6 | 13.3 | 19.8 | 22.3 | 21.2 | 15.4 | 9.6 | -1.8 | -5.6 |
| Mean maximum | 4.4 | 6.5 | 13.2 | 20 | 26.3 | 31.6 | 31.8 | 31.1 | 32.9 | 29.3 | 18.8 | 6.3 | |
| 2013 (year) | |||||||||||||
| Rainfall (mm/month) | 4.2 | 7.1 | 16.7 | 27.2 | 68.8 | 118.5 | 203.4 | 124 | 75.6 | 29.3 | 26.3 | 12.3 | |
| Air temperature (°C) | Mean minimum | -7.1 | -8.2 | -1.2 | 6.8 | 7.7 | 16.1 | 17.9 | 17.7 | 11.6 | 8.6 | -3.2 | -6.2 |
| Mean maximum | 8.3 | 10.6 | 17.1 | 24 | 27.3 | 31.3 | 34.1 | 32.6 | 31.1 | 29.9 | 24.7 | 8.5 | |
Dry matter and nutrient yields (kg/ha) of different cultivation patterns.
| Treatments | DM Yield (kg/ha) | Nutrient Content (%) | Nutrient Yield (kg/ha) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CP | NDF | CP | NDF | |||
| Intercropping | corn | 11952 | 8.89 | 45.4 | 1062 | 5427 |
| rye | 4750 | 10.8 | 64.2 | 505 | 3050 | |
| alfalfa | 17701 | 19.3 | 37.5 | 3422 | 6631 | |
| summed | 34403 | / | / | 4989 | 15108 | |
| Rotation | corn | 23471 | 8.81 | 44.9 | 2068 | 10538 |
| rye | 7656 | 9.98 | 64.1 | 764 | 4907 | |
| summed | 31127 | / | / | 2887 | 15574 | |
| Sole crop | alfalfa | 22428 | 18.5 | 37.4 | 4154 | 8402 |
| SEM | 153.9 | 0.71 | 0.27 | 26.1 | 60.3 | |
| ANOVA | ||||||
| Main effects | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |
| Intercropping. | rotation | / | / | / | / | / |
| corn | / | 0.590 | 0.945 | / | / | |
| rye | / | 0.419 | 0.957 | / | / | |
| summed | 0.002 | / | / | <0.001 | 0.001 | |
| Intercropping. | sole crop alfalfa | <0.001 | 0.797 | 0.872 | 0.002 | <0.001 |
* The SEM values represent the overall standard error of means in each column.
The 48-h degradability and yields of degradable dry matter (DM), crude protein (CP)and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) based on 48-h degradability.
| Treatments | Degradability (%) | Degradable nutrient yields (kg/ha) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DM | CP | NDF | DM | CP | NDF | ||
| Intercropping | mixture | 58.8 | 85 | 65.6 | 20218 | 4239 | 9907 |
| Rotation | corn | 52.6 | 43.9 | 63.6 | 12343 | 913 | 6776 |
| rye | 34.4 | 44.4 | 56.7 | 2630 | 358 | 2788 | |
| summed | / | / | / | 14973 | 1272 | 9564 | |
| Sole crop | alfalfa | 74.9 | 96.4 | 78.3 | 16789 | 4006 | 6579 |
| SEM | 0.56 | 0.48 | 0.66 | 171.4 | 25.7 | 82.8 | |
| ANOVA | |||||||
| Main effects | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |
| Intercropping. | rotation | ||||||
| corn | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.167 | / | / | / | |
| rye | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | / | / | / | |
| summed | / | / | / | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.087 | |
| Intercropping. | sole crop alfalfa | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.013 | <0.001 |
#Mixture was the harvest material from intercropping system composed of corn (stalk + grain), rye, and alfalfa according to the actual yield in field. i.e. rye hay: corn stalk: corn grain: alfalfa hay = 1:1.5:1.5:4.
* The SEM values represent the overall standard error of means in each column.
The in sacco degradation kinetics* of different cultivation patterns.
| Test feedstuffs | SEM | Effects | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rye | Corn | Mixture | Alfalfa | |||
| DM | ||||||
| a | 12.0d | 25.6c | 28.6b | 49.2a | 0.84 | <0.001 |
| b | 31.6b | 34.9a | 37.4a | 33.0ab | 1.38 | 0.011 |
| c | 0.035b | 0.043ab | 0.038ab | 0.045a | 0.0025 | 0.071 |
| d | 43.6d | 60.4c | 65.9b | 80.2a | 0.76 | <0.001 |
| L | 0.94c | 1.38b | 0.16d | 6.75a | 0.386 | <0.001 |
| E | 37.3d | 46.0c | 49.3b | 66.8a | 0.38 | <0.001 |
| CP | ||||||
| a | 23.8c | 20.9d | 69.5b | 75.6a | 0.24 | <0.001 |
| b | 23.8b | 28.1a | 17.9d | 21.9c | 0.3 | <0.001 |
| c | 0.065a | 0.040c | 0.052b | 0.054b | 0.0017 | <0.001 |
| d | 47.6d | 49.0c | 87.4b | 97.5a | 0.41 | <0.001 |
| L | 3.02a | 2.63a | 1.88b | 1.41c | 0.126 | <0.001 |
| E | 40.0d | 36.9c | 80.9b | 89.7a | 0.12 | <0.001 |
| NDF | ||||||
| a | 23.5c | 40.2b | 37.8b | 48.6a | 1.44 | <0.001 |
| b | 33.3a | 26.3b | 36.3a | 33.8a | 1.61 | 0.012 |
| c | 0.018d | 0.093a | 0.036c | 0.050b | 0.7464 | <0.001 |
| d | 56.9d | 66.4c | 74.1b | 82.4a | 1.27 | <0.001 |
| L | 2.06c | 2.89b | 2.29b | 6.87a | 0.774 | 0.002 |
| E | 52.1d | 56.0c | 57.5b | 69.8a | 0.5 | <0.001 |
*a, soluble fraction (%); b, degradable but insoluble fraction (%); c, rate constant (%/h) of degradation of fraction b; d = a+ b, the potential degradable fraction (%); L, lag time (h) and E, effective degradability calculated with a passage rate (k) of 6%/h.
†Different letters in the same row indicate significant differences (P< 0.05).
#Mixture was the harvest material from intercropping system composed of corn (stalk + grain), rye, and alfalfa according to the actual yield in field. i.e. rye hay: corn stalk: corn grain: alfalfa hay = 1:1.5:1.5:4.
Fig 2Transverse sections of alfalfa, rye and corn stems before and after degradation.
a. the anatomic structure of alfalfa stem (the cross-section of the seventh internode); b. the anatomic structure of rumen-degraded alfalfa stem subjected to sole cropping; c. the anatomic structure of intercropping alfalfa stem degraded together with rye and corn stem in rumen; d. the anatomic structure of rye stem (the cross-section of the fourth internode); e. the anatomic structure of rumen-degraded rye stem subjected to sole cropping; f. the anatomic structure of intercropping rye stem degraded with alfalfa and corn stem in rumen; g. the anatomic structure of corn stalk (the cross-section of the fourth internode); h. the anatomic structure of rumen-degraded corn stalk subjected to sole cropping; i. the anatomic structure of intercropping corn stalk degraded with rye and alfalfa stem in rumen.