Proximate principles and dry matter digestibility of fodder maize and sugargraze in response to potassium management

R K MAHANTA; R K MEENA; RAKESH KUMAR; HARDEV RAM; M SINGH; A BHAKAR; D KUMAR; S BHATTACHARJEE

doi:10.56093/ijans.v93i04.119092

Authors

R K MAHANTA ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
R K MEENA ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
RAKESH KUMAR ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
HARDEV RAM ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
M SINGH ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
A BHAKAR ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi
D KUMAR ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India
S BHATTACHARJEE ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v93i04.119092

Keywords:

Fodder quality, Maize, Potassium management, Sugargraze

Abstract

The study was carried out to evaluate the forage quality of maize and sugargraze as influenced by different potassium management practices. The experiment was laid out in split-plot design in which two fodder crops, viz. maize and sugargraze, were taken as the main plot, and different potassium management regimes were taken as a subplot. Results revealed that the quality parameters of sugargraze and fodder maize crops, viz. Dry matter, crude protein, ether extract, ash content, neutral detergent fibre, acid detergent fibre, and acid detergent lignin were significantly influenced favourably by potassium management. Comparing the quality parameters, remarkably highest CP (9.70%), total ash content (9.87%) as well as potassium uptake (230 kg/ha) were obtained with 50 kg K2O + KSB + 2% KNO3 foliar spray; however, higher ether extract (1.73%) was recorded in 50 kg K2O + KSB + 2% K2SO4 foliar spray. The fibre fractions, viz. NDF (66.1%), ADF (35.4%) and ADL (4.70%) recorded considerably lower values with 25 kg K2O + KSB + 2% KNO3 foliar spray over control. The higher values of TDN (59.3%), DMD (63.6 g/kg), RFV (94.7%) and DMI (1.92 g/kg) were recorded in fodder maize over sugargraze with an application of 25 kg K2O + KSB + 2% KNO3 foliar spray. Therefore, considering all the studied parameters, it can be concluded that getting higher quality green biomass production of fodder maize and sugargraze with the application of 25 kg K2O + KSB + 2% KNO3 would be a more feasible agro-practice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahmad M, Waheed A, Niaz A, Hannan A and Ranjha A M. 2009. Maize fodder quality characteristics and yield as affected by potassium application on calcareous sandy clay loam soil. Soil and Environment 28(2): 169–73.

Amanullah A I and Irfanullah Z H. 2016. Potassium management for improving growth and grain yield of maize (Zea mays L.) under moisture stress conditions. Scientific Reports 6: 34627. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep34627

AOAC. 2005. Official Methods of Analysis. Eighteenth revised. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Ayub M, Nadeem M A, Tanveer A and Husain A. 2002. Effect of different levels of nitrogen and harvesting times on the growth, yield and quality of sorghum fodder. Asian Journal of Plant Science 1(4): 304–07. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2002.304.307

Badr M A, Shafei A M and Sharaf El-Deen S H. 2006. The dissolution of K and P-bearing minerals by silicate dissolving bacteria and their effect on sorghum growth. Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences 2(1): 5–11.

Das A, Prasad M, Gautam R C and Shivay Y S. 2006. Productivity of cotton as influenced by organic and inorganic sources of nitrogen. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 76(6): 354– 57.

Gao W, Shou N, Jiang C, Ma R and Yang X. 2022. Optimizing N application for forage sorghum to maximize yield, quality, and N use efficiency while reducing environmental costs. Agronomy 12(12): 2969. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12122969

Kar S, Singh M., Kumar P, Kumar R and Makarana G. 2017. Evaluation of sugargraze (Sorghum bicolor), fodder maize (Zea mays) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) under different source of nitrogen. Indian Journal of Agronomy 62(2): 236–38.

Kour M, Khan N, Singh R, Sharma B C, Thakur N P, Azad M S, Kumar P, Choudhary P and Mahajan S. 2023. Developing cropping sequence modules for round the year green fodder production under irrigated conditions in North-west Himalayan region. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 93(2): 218–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v93i2.126084

Krishna K R. 2010. Agro ecosystems of South India: Nutrient Dynamics, Ecology and Productivity. (Ed) Boca Raton F L. Brown Walker Press, 552p.

Lithourgidis A S, Vasilakoglou I B, Dhima K V, Dordas C A, Yiakoulaki M D. 2006. Forage yield and quality of common vetch mixtures with oat and triticale in two seeding ratios. Field Crops Research 99: 106–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2006.03.008

Moinuddin and Imas P. 2010. Effect of zinc nutrition on growth, yield, and quality of forage sorghum in respect with increasing potassium application rates. Journal of Plant Nutrition 33: 2062–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2010.519081

Morgan J B and Connolly E L. 2013. Plant soil interaction: Nutrient uptake. Nature Education Knowledge 4(8): 2.

Nascimento K S, Loiola Edvan R, Rodrigues A C C, Gomes N S, Barbosa R S, Martins V and Junio de Jesus Lacerda J. 2021. Evaluation of forage potential of tropical grasses under different potassium application times. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 52(6): 551–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2020.1862158

Raj, A K, Raj R M, Kunhamu T, Jamaludheen V and Chichaghare A. 2023. Management of tree fodder banks for quality forage production and carbon sequestration in humid tropical cropping systems–An overview. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 93(1): 10–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v93i1.120692

Van-Soest P J, Robertson J B and Lewis B A. 1991. Methods for dietary fibre, neutral detergent fibre and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74(10): 3583–597. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2

Wichman D. 2001. Fertilizer use on dryland perennial forages. Fertilizer Facts 27: 12–14.

Zampaligre N, Yoda G, Delma J, Sanfo A, Balehegn M, Rios E, Dubeux J C, Boote K and Adesogan A T. 2022. Fodder biomass, nutritive value, and grain yield of dual‐purpose improved cereal crops in Burkina Faso. Agronomy Journal 114(1): 115–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20860

Zenda T, Liu S, Dong A and Duan H. 2021. Revisiting Sulphur- The once neglected nutrient: It’s roles in plant growth, metabolism, stress tolerance and crop production. Agriculture 11: 626. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11070626