Water use efficiency of pastures in a mollisol of the Semiarid Pampa

  • Romina Fernández INTA
  • Ileana Frasier INTA
  • Mauricio Uhaldegaray INTA
  • Juan Oderiz INTA
  • Eric Scherger INTA
  • Elke Johanna Noellemeyer Universidad Nacional de La Pampa - Facultad de Agronomía
  • Alberto Quiroga INTA Universidad Nacional de La Pampa - Facultad de Agronomía

Keywords:

wheatgrass, fescue, consumptive water use

Abstract

Currently, in the semiarid Pampa, there is a growing interest by farmers to reintroduce pastures into crop rotations. In response to this demand, the objective was to evaluate the biomass production, quality, and efficiency by pastures of two species with and without nitrogen fertilization in a Mollisol of the semiarid Pampa. The treatments were Fescue-Wheatgrass and Wheatgrass-Lucerne without nutrient contribution (T) and fertilized with nitrogen (F). The design was in completely randomized blocks with 3 replicates.Aerial biomass dry matter, digestibility and protein contents were determined during four growing seasons. Soil moisture content was determined at each date of biomass harvest, and the consumptive water use (UC) and water use efficiency (EUA) were calculated. The results showed that Wheatgrass-Lucerne presented higher production, better quality and no response to fertilization, compared to Fescue-Wheatgrass. In the latter, the response to fertilization was significant, affecting both biomass and protein content. The effect of fertilization in Fescue-Wheatgrass firstly improved the quality and afterwards resulted in higher quantity of fodder produced. The average UC during the 4-year period of both pastures was similar, 781 mm for Fescue - Wheatgrass and 758 mm for Wheatgrass - Lucerne, the average EUA was superior in Wheatgrass - Lucerne (10,4 kg DM.ha-1.year-1 ) compared to Fescue-Wheatgrass (8, 5 kg DM.ha-1 .year -1 ). On average, pasture Fescue - Wheatgrass produced 1.8 and 2.6 kg.ha-1 of protein per day for T and F respectively, while Wheatgrass - Lucerne presented values of 2.8 and 3.1 kg.ha-1 of protein per day for T and F, respectively.

 

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.19137/semiarida.2017(01).19-25

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Agnusdei M. 2014. Agropiro, la pastura que rehabilita suelos marginales. http://intainforma.inta.gov.ar/.

Agnusdei M., S. Assuero, F. Lattanzi & M. Marino. 2010. Critical N concentration can vary with growth conditions in forage grasses: implications for plant N status assessment and N deficiency diagnosis. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst.

Agnusdei M., O. Di Marco,A. Marino, P. Errecart & J. Insúa. 2014. Festuca alta: una mirada ecofisiológica para entender y manejar la producción, calidad y eficiencia de utilización del forraje. XXII reunión anual de forrajeras. INTA pergamino.

Bauder J.,A. Bauer, J. Ramírez & D. Cassel. 1978. Alfalfa water use and production on dryland and irrigated sandy loam. Agron. J. 70: 95-99.

Berdahl J., J. Karn & J. Hendrickson. 2001. Dry matter yields of cool-season grass monocultures and grass-alfalfa binary mixtures. Agron. J. 93: 463-467.

Carámbula M. 2007. Las gramíneas. Pasturas y forrajes potenciales y alternativas para producir forrajes. Agropecuaria Hemisferio Sur S.R.L. Bs As. pp. 108-111.

Hendrickson J., M. Liebig & J. Berdahl. 2008. Responses of medicago sativa and M. falcate type alfalfas to different defoliation times and grass competition. Can. J. Plant Sci. 88: 61-69.

Hendrickson J., M. Schmer & M. Sanderson. 2013. Water Use Efficiency by Switchgrass Compared to a Native Grass or a Native Grass Alfalfa Mixture. University of Nebraska – Lincoln. DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska.

Louarn G., E. Pereira-Lops, J. Fustec, B. Mary, A. Voisin, P. de Faccio Carvalho & F. Gastal. 2015. The amounts and dynamics of nitrogen transfer to grasses differ in alfalfa and white clover-based grass-legume mixtures as a result of rooting strategies and rhizodeposit quality. Plant Soil 389: 289-305.

Mills A., D. Moot & P. Jamieson. 2009. Quantifying the effect of nitrogen of productivity of cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata L.) pastures. European J. Agron. 30: 63-69.

Moot D. 2014. A review of recent research and extension on dryland lucerne in New Zealand. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 74: 86-93.

Parsons J., G. Edwards, P. Newton, D. Chapman, J. Caradus, S. Rasmussen & J. Rowarth. 2010. Past lessons and future prospects: plant breeding for yield and persistence in cool-temperate pastures. Grass and Forage Science

Ruiz M., E.Adema, T. Rucci & F. Babinec. 2004. Publicación Técnica Nº 54. EEAINTAAnguil. 36p.

Sevilla G. & M. Spada. 2012.Avances en agropiro alargado. INTA.

Sleugh B., K. Moore, J. George & E. Brummer. 2000. Binary legume-grass mixtures improve forage yield, quality, and seasonal distribution. Agron. J. 92: 24-29.

Stout W., G. Jung & J. Shaffer. 1988. Effects of soil and nitrogen on water use efficiency of tall fescue and switchgrass under humid conditions. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 52: 429-434.

Vallejo A., R. Souto & A. Quiroga. 2002. Siembra directa y fertilización en sistemas ganaderos de la región semiárida. INTAAnguil, Bol. Div. Téc. 74: 1-13.

Viglizzo E.F., L.V. Carreño, H. Pereyra, F. Ricard, J. Clatt & D. Pincén. 2010. Dinámica de la frontera agropecuaria y cambio tecnológico. In: Expansión de la frontera agropecuaria y su impacto ecológico-ambiental (E.F. Viglizzo y E. Jobággy eds). INTA. pp 10-16.

Published

2018-02-16

How to Cite

Fernández, R., Frasier, I., Uhaldegaray, M., Oderiz, J., Scherger, E., Noellemeyer, E. J., & Quiroga, A. (2018). Water use efficiency of pastures in a mollisol of the Semiarid Pampa. Semiárida, 27(1), 19–25. Retrieved from https://cerac.unlpam.edu.ar/ojs/index.php/semiarida/article/view/2157

Issue

Section

Artículos Científicos y Técnicos