The effects of planting time and combination on the nutrient composition and digestible dry matter yield of four mixtures of vetch varieties intercropped with barley

Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 297-302

  Bingöl, N Tuǧba ^a   Karsli, M Akif ^a   Yilmaz, I Hakki ^a   Bolat, Duran ^a  

^a YUZUNCU YIL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Digestibility; Digestible DM yields; Nutrient composition; Vetch barley mixtures

Indexed keywords

HORDEUM; VICIA; VICIA SATIVA SUBSP. NIGRA;

EID: 36448964871     PISSN: 13000128     EISSN: 13036181     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Ergün, A., Tuncer, Ş.D.: Hayvan Besleme ve Beslenme Hastaliklari. Medipress, Ankara. 2001.
2. Minson, D.J., Wilson, J.R.: Prediction of intake as element of forage quality. In: Fahey, G.C. Jr., Ed. Forage Quality, Evaluation, and Utilization. American Society of Agronomy, Inc. Crop Science Society of America, Inc. Soil Science Society of America, Inc. Madison, WI. 1994; 533-563.
3. Papastylianou, I., Danso S.K.A.: Nitrogen fixation and transfer in vetch and vetch-oat mixtures. Soil Biol. Biochem., 1991; 23: 447-452.
4. 15N isotopic dilution. Plant and Soil, 1996; 183: 137-148.
5. Al-Masri, M.R.: Yield and nutritive value of vetch (Vicia sativa) -barley (Hordeum vulgare) forage under different harvesting regimens. Trop. Grasslands, 1998; 32: 201-206.
6. Newton, A.C., Swanston, J.S., Guy, D.C., Ellis, R.P. The effect of cultivar mixtures on malting quality in winter barley. J. Inst. Brew. 1998; 104: 41-45.
7. th Ed.). Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC. 1980.
8. Van Soest, P.J., Robertson J.B.: Systems of analyses for evaluation of fibrous feed. In: W.J. Pigden, C.C. Balch, and M. Graham, Eds. Proc. Int. Workshop on Standardization of Analytical Methodology for Feeds. Int. Dev. Res. Center, Ottawa, Canada. 1979; 49-60.
9. Goering, H.K., Van Soest, P.J.: Forage Fiber Analyses. Apparatus, Reagent, Procedures and Applications. USDA Agric. Handbook No. 379. 1970.
10. Tilley, J.M.A., Terry, R.A.: A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Grass Forage Sci., 1963; 18: 104-111.
11. Marten, G.C., Barnes, R.F.: Prediction of energy digestibility of forages with in vitro rumen fermentation and fungal enzyme systems. In: W.J. Pigden, C.C. Balch, and M. Graham, Eds. Proc. Int. Workshop on Standardization of Analytical Methodology for Feed. Int. Dev. Res. Center, Ottawa, Canada. 1980; 61-71.
12. th Ed.), National Academy Press, Washington, DC. 1996.
13. Weiss, W.P., Conrad, H.R., St. Pierre, N.R.: A theoretically-based model for predicting total digestible nutrient values of forages and concentrates. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 1992; 39: 95-110.
14. SAS: User's Guide Statistics, Version 5 ed. SAS inst., Inc., Cary, NC. 1985.
15. Smith, B.W.: Feed Industry Red Book. Communications Marketing, Inc., MN. 1990.
16. Deniz, S., Nursoy, H., Yilmaz, İ., Karsli, M.A.: Vejetasyonun farkli devrelerinde hasat edilmenin bazi misir varyetelerinde besin madde içeriǧi ve silaj kalitesi ile sindirilebilir kuru madde miktarina etkisi. S. Ü. Vet. Bil. Derg., 2001; 17: 43-49.
17. Keskin, B., Yilmaz, İ.H., Karsli, M.A., Nursoy, H.: Effects of urea or urea plus molasses supplementation to silages with different sorghum varieties harvested at the milk stage on the quality and in vitro dry matter digestibility of silages. Turk. J. Vet. Anim. Sci., 2005; 29: 1143-1147.
18. Karsli, M.A., Akdeniz, H., Levendoǧlu, T., Terzioǧlu, Ö.: Evaluation of the nutrient content and protein fractions of four different common vetch varieties. Turk. J. Vet. Anim. Sci., 2005; 29: 1291-1297.
19. Altinok, S., Hakyemez H. B.: Ankara koşullarinda tüylü fiǧ ve koca fiǧin arpa ile karişimlarinda farkli karişm oranlarinin yem verimine etkileri. Ankara Tarim Bil. Der., 2002; 8: 45-50.
20. Karadaǧ, Y., Büyükburç U.: Effects of seed rates on forage production, seed yield and hay quality of annual legume-barley mixtures. Turk. J. Agric. For., 2003; 27: 169-174.
21. Yilmaz, S., Günel, E., Saǧlamtimur, T.: Determination of the most suitable seeding rates and cutting ties of common vetch (Vicia sativa L.) + barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) mixture under Hatay ecological condition. 3rd Rangeland and Forage Crops Congress, Erzurum, Turkey. 1996; 355-361.
22. Lithourgidis, A.S., Vasilakoglou, I.B., Dhima, K.V., Dordas, C.A., Yiakoulaki, M.D.: Forage yield and quality of common vetch mixtures with oat and triticale in two seeding ratios. Field Crops Res., 2006; 99: 106-113.
23. Karadaǧ, Y.: Forage yields, seed yields and botanical composition of some legume-barley mixtures under rainfed condition in semiarid regions of Turkey. Asian J. Plant Sci., 2004; 3: 295-299.
24. Singh, A., Dhingra, K.K., Singh, J., Singh, M.P.. Effect of sowing time and plant density on growth, yield and quality of Ethiopian mustard (Brassica carinata A.Br.). J. Res., Punjab Agricult. Univ., 2002; 39: 471-475.
25. Qamar, I.A., Keatinge, J.D.H., Mohammad, N., Ali, A., Khan, M.A.: Introduction and management of vetch/barley forage mixtures in the rainfed areas of Pakistan. 2. Forage quality. Aust. J. Agr. Res., 1999; 50: 11-20.
26. Nelson, C.J., Moser, L.E.: Factors affecting forage quality. In: Fahey, G.C. Jr., (Ed.). Forage Quality, Evaluation, and Utilization. American Society of Agronomy, Inc. Crop Science Society of America, Inc. Soil Science Society of America, Inc. Madison, WI. 1994; 115-154.
27. Tan, M., Serin Y.: Deǧişik fiǧ+tahil karişmlari için en uygun karişim oranini ve biçim zamaninin belirlenmesi üzerine bir araştirma. Atatürk Üniv. Ziraat Fak. Derg., 1996; 27: 475-489.