The effects of first defoliation and previous management intensity on forage quality of a semi-natural species-rich grassland

Abstract

Semi-natural grasslands occupy large parts of the European landscape but little information exists about seasonal variations in their nutritive value during the growing season. This paper presents results of novel data showing the effect of 13 years of previous contrasting management intensities on herbage nutritional value in relation to different dates of first defoliation (by grazing or haymaking). The treatments were: extensive management and intensive management from previous years (1998–2011). Both treatments were cut in June followed by intensive/extensive grazing for the rest of the grazing season (July–October). To evaluate forage quality in the first defoliation date, biomass sampling was performed in the year 2012 for 23 weeks from May to mid-October, and in 2013 for seven weeks from May to mid-June. Sampling was performed from plots that were not under management during the sampling year. Previous extensive management was associated with significantly reduced forage quality for in vitro organic matter digestibility (IVOMD), crude protein, neutral detergent fibre, acid detergent fibre and reduced divalent cations (Ca, Mg) and Na during the first seven weeks of the grazing season and the forage was suitable only for beef cattle. Due to low forage IVOMD, the forage is suitable only for cattle maintenance or for low quality hay when the start of grazing was postponed from seven weeks of vegetative growth to 13 weeks, regardless of the previous intensity. Herbage harvested after 13 weeks of the grazing season was of very low quality and was unsuitable as a forage for cattle when it was the only source of feed. Agri-environmental payments are necessary to help agricultural utilisation to maintain semi-natural grasslands by compensating for deterioration of forage quality, not only for the postponement of the first defoliation (either as cutting or grazing) after mid-June, but also when extensive management is required.

Evaluation of genetic diversity and production adaptability in different germplasms of Paspalum dilatatum

“…Nutrient contents, such as CF, EE, CP, CA and NFE, are important indicators to assess the nutritional value of forages. The nutritional quality of forage determines its utilization efficiency and regulates its digestion and absorption, nutrient acquisition and energy intake (Pavlu ˚et al, 2021). Crude fiber can only be digested and utilized by ruminant livestock.…”

Species composition of semi‐natural mesic grasslands as a factor influencing the methane yield of plant biomass (Central Europe)

“…However, this type of substrate may require elaborate pre‐treatment due to the high fibre fraction content. A later harvest time results in an increase in the lignocellulosic compound contents in plants (Buxton, 1996; Pavlů, Kassahun, et al, 2021), which may adversely influence the biodegradation process and biogas potential (Triolo et al, 2012). Owing to the intensification of agriculture and decreasing interest to use grassland biomass, the abandonment of large grassland areas has been observed for a long time (Isselstein et al, 2005), particularly in Poland.…”

Multi-Trait Selection of Quinoa Ideotypes at Different Levels of Cutting and Spacing

“…ADF is a fiber portion that consists of lignin and cellulose. ADF is mainly associated with the digestibility of forage and is, therefore, necessary to compute forage net energy (NE) or total digestible nutrients (TDN) for silage, haylage, and hay [70]. On the other hand, NDF is the most common measure of fiber used for animal feed analysis but does not represent a unique class of chemical compounds.…”