2019
DOI: 10.5539/jas.v11n5p433
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cutting Height of Mombasa Grass Under Silvopastoral and Monoculture Systems

Abstract: This study aimed to evaluate the production of Mombasa grass cultivation under two different systems: monoculture and silvopastoral, with heights of 70, 80, 90, and 100 cm. Two seasons were evaluated: rainy period (December to March) and rain/drought transition (March to June). The variables evaluated were: total dry mass (TDM), dry mass (DM) of the morphological components, number of tillers, efficiency of nitrogen use, DM content, number of harvest cycles and cutting intervals. The experimental design was a … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although such a result is in accordance with Orefice (2019) [66], other reports found that shade in the ISPS decreased forage production by 30% [67,68]. According to Rodrigues et al (2019) [24], biomass production of Mombasa grass (Megathyrsus maximus) is affected by the shadow projected by the trees. In a similar study, Alvarado-Figueroa (2017) [65] reported a higher water retention capacity for the ISPS, which is associated with lower water losses due to evapotranspiration, favoring the availability of groundwater and the improvement of soil fertility.…”
Section: Dry Matter Yield and Chemical Composition Of Pasturesupporting
confidence: 63%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although such a result is in accordance with Orefice (2019) [66], other reports found that shade in the ISPS decreased forage production by 30% [67,68]. According to Rodrigues et al (2019) [24], biomass production of Mombasa grass (Megathyrsus maximus) is affected by the shadow projected by the trees. In a similar study, Alvarado-Figueroa (2017) [65] reported a higher water retention capacity for the ISPS, which is associated with lower water losses due to evapotranspiration, favoring the availability of groundwater and the improvement of soil fertility.…”
Section: Dry Matter Yield and Chemical Composition Of Pasturesupporting
confidence: 63%
“…ISPSs provide environmental services such as erosion control, watershed protection, carbon sequestration (27-163% more than monoculture systems, MS), reductions in methane emissions, atmospheric nitrogen fixation, reductions in biodiversity loss, and modifications of the microclimate improving animal welfare [13,15,[18][19][20][21]. Overall, ISPSs have been reported to be more productive at animal (e.g., higher milk and beef yield) and pasture levels (32% higher dry matter production [22]) per unit of area compared with conventional or monoculture livestock systems [15,[22][23][24][25].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, proper cutting could promote the increase of tiller number, which was the key to improve DM yield (Rodrigues et al, 2019). However, the reduced CP content of forage with cutting was due to the leaf number and root nitrogen reserves (Berg et al, 2007).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%