This study was conducted to
assess the fermentation and nutritive value of sorghum silage mixed with lablab
at different proportions. The treatments consisted of a combination of two
sorghum genotypes viz. “Brown midrib” and “Brachytic dwarf” genotype of
lablab and six population proportions viz. 150:0, 112.5:37.5, 75:75,
37.5:112.5, 0:150 and 150:150 × 103 plants·ha-1 sorghum genotypes and lablab,
respectively totalling to 12 numbers. Sorghum genotypes and lablab were grown
as monocrop and in intercropping systems in the same field. Forage sorghum was
harvested at the late-dough stage and lablab at 20% bloom. They were cut and
chopped together and ensiled. Lablab in the silage mixture was its actual
contribution to the total forage mixture. For each mixture, a 1-L glass jar
(mini-silo) was filled with 500 g of fresh material and replicated four times. Forage
in mini silos was fermented for 60 days at room temperature (25°C). Pre
and post-silage dry samples were analysed for nutritive value and ensiled
samples were analysed for fermentation characteristics. There was no
significant difference in nutritive value between sorghum genotypes. The
greatest impact of mixing lablab with sorghum genotypes was on crude protein
(CP) and acid detergent fiber (ADF), but not
on neutral detergent fiber (NDF). Across treatments, CP, ADF pH, lactic,
and acetic acid concentrations increased as the proportion of LB was increased. The
results indicated that lablab as an intercrop with sorghum for greater DM yield
and forage and silage quality than respective monocrops.
References
[1]
Dawo, M.I., Wilkinson, J.M., Sanders, F.E.T. and Pilbeam, D.J. (2007) The Yield and Quality of Fresh and Ensiled Plant Material from Intercropped Maize (Zea mays) and Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 87, 1391-1399. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2879
[2]
Angadi, S.V., Umesh, M.R., Begna, S. and Gowda, P. (2022) Light Interception, Agronomic Performance, and Nutritive Quality of Annual Forage Legumes as Affected by Shade. Field Crops Research, 275, Article ID: 108358.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2021.108358
[3]
Lauriault, L.M., Angadi, S.V., Marsalis, M.A. and Van Leeuwen, D.M. (2012) A Comparison of Pigeonpea and Cowpea Forage Yield and Nutritive Value in the Southern High Plains of the USA. Bulletin, 802, 1-8.
[4]
Umesh, M.R., Angadi, S., Begna, S. and Gowda, P. (2022) Planting Density and Geometry Effect on Canopy Development, Forage Yield and Nutritive Value of Sorghum and Annual Legumes Intercropping. Sustainability, 14, Article No. 4517.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084517
[5]
Rao, S.C., Northup, B.K. and Mayeux, H.S. (2005) Candidate Cool-Season Legumes for Filling Forage Deficit Periods in the Southern Great Plains. Crop Science, 45, 2068-2074. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2005.0019
[6]
Rao, S.C., Coleman, S.W. and Mayeux, H.S. (2002) Forage Production and Nutritive Value of Selected Pigeonpea Ecotypes in the Southern Great Plains. Crop Science, 42, 1259-1263. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2002.1259
[7]
Contreras-Govea, F.E., Van Leeuwen, D.M., Angadi, S.V. and Marsalis, M.A. (2013) Enhances in Crude Protein and Effects on Fermentation Profile of Corn and Forage Sorghum Silage with Addition of Cowpea. Forage and Grazinglands, 11, 1-7.
https://doi.org/10.1094/FG-2013-0622-01-RS
[8]
Angadi, S.V., Umesh, M.R., Contreras-Govea, F.E., Annadurai, K., Begna, S.H., Marsalis, M.A., Cole, N., Gowda, P.H., Robert Hagevoort, G. and Lauriault, L.M. (2016) In Search of Annual Legumes to Improve Forage Sorghum Yield and Nutritive Value in the Southern High Plains. Crop, Forage & Turfgrass Management, 2, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.2134/cftm2015.0182
[9]
Begna, S., Angadi, S., Mesbah, A. Umesh, M.R. and Stamm, M. (2021) Forage Yield and Quality of Winter Canola-Pea Mixed Cropping System. Sustainability, 13, Article No. 2122. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042122
[10]
Contreras-Govea, F.E., Marsalis, M., Angadi, S.V., Smith, G., Lauriault, L.M. and Van Leeuwen, D. (2011) Fermentability and Nutritive Value of Corn and Forage Sorghum Silage When in Mixture with Lablab Bean. Crop Science, 51, 1307-1313.
https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2010.05.0282
[11]
Htet, M.N.S., Soomro, R.N. and Bo, H.J. (2017) Effects of Different Planting Pattern of Maize (Zea mays L.) and Soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merrill) Intercropping in Resource Consumption on Fodder Yield, and Silage Quality. American Journal of Plant Sciences, 8, 666-679. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2017.84046
[12]
Jones, B.A., Hatfield, R.D. and Muck, R.E. (1992) Effect of Fermentation and Bacterial Inoculation on Lucerne Cell Walls. Journal of Science Food Agriculture, 60, 147-153.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740600203
[13]
Contreras-Govea, F.E., Lauriault, L.M., Marsalis, M.A., Angadi, S.V. and Puppala, N. (2009) Performance of Forage Sorghum-Legume Mixtures in Southern High Plains, USA. Forage and Grazinglands, 7, 1-8.
https://doi.org/10.1094/FG-2009-0401-01-RS
[14]
Mustafa, A.F. and Seguin, P. (2003) Characteristics and in Situ Degradability of Whole Crop Faba Bean, Pea and Soybean Silages. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 83, 793-799. https://doi.org/10.4141/A03-065
[15]
Kung, L. and Shaver, R. (2001) Interpretation and Use of Silage Fermentation Analysis Reports. Focus on Forages, 3, 1-5.
[16]
Woolford, M.K. and Pahlow, G. (1998) The Silage Fermentation. In: Wood, B.J.B., Ed., Microbiology of Fermented Foods, Springer, Boston, 73-102.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0309-1_3
[17]
Bolsen, K.K. (2004) Sorghum Silage: A Summary of 25 Years of Research at Kansas State University. Southwest Dairy Herd Management Conference Proceedings, Macon, GA, 16-17 November 2004.
[18]
Park, A.L. and Phipps, R.H. (2000) The Potential of Forage-Maize Intercrops in Ruminant Nutrition. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 85, 157-164.
