4.3 Article

Carbohydrate and crude protein fractions in perennial ryegrass as affected by defoliation frequency and nitrogen application rate

期刊

GRASS AND FORAGE SCIENCE
卷 72, 期 3, 页码 556-567

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/gfs.12258

关键词

nitrogen application rate; leaf stage; protein fraction

类别

资金

  1. Dairy Consortium, Chile

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of defoliation frequency (either at two-or three-leaf stage) and nitrogen (N) application rate (0, 75, 150, 300, 450 kg N ha(-1) year(-1)) on herbage carbohydrate and crude protein (CP) fractions, and the water-soluble carbohydrate-to-protein ratio (WSC: CP) in perennial ryegrass swards. Crude protein fractions were analysed according to the Cornell carbohydrate and protein system. Carbohydrate fractions were analysed by ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography. Sward defoliation at two-leaf stage increased the total CP, reduced the buffer-soluble CP fractions and decreased carbohydrate fractions of herbage (P < 0.001). The effect of defoliation frequency was less marked during early spring and autumn (P < 0.001) than for the rest of the seasons. An increase in N application rate was negatively associated with WSC, fructans and neutral detergent fibre (P < 0.001), and positively associated with CP and nitrate (N-NO3) contents of herbage. Nitrogen application rate did not affect CP fractions of herbage (P > 0.05). The fluctuations in CP and WSC contents of herbage resulted in lower WSC: CP ratios during early spring and autumn (0.45: 1 and 0.75: 1 respectively) than in late spring (1.11: 1). The herbage WSC: CP ratio was greater (P < 0.001) at the three-leaf than the two-leaf defoliation stage and declined as the N application increased in all seasons (P < 0.001). The results of this study indicate that CP and carbohydrate fractions of herbage can be manipulated by sward defoliation frequency and N application rate. The magnitude of these effects, however, may vary with the season.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据