Título : | Effect of irrigation and grazing on the production of an alfalfa pasture (Medicago sativa L.) |
Autor(es) : | Puppo Collazo, Lucia Hayashi, Raquel Beretta, Andres Morales, Pablo |
Fecha de publicación : | ene-2024 |
Tipo de publicación: | Artículo |
Versión: | Publicado |
Areas del conocimiento : | Ciencias Agrícolas Agricultura, Silvicultura y Pesca Ciencias del Suelo Agricultura |
Otros descriptores : | Productividad forraje Riego pasturas Umbral de riego |
Resumen : | Alfalfa is a forage species widely used in Uruguay in intensive livestock and dairy farming. Supplementary irrigation makes it possible to mitigate the negative effects of climate change, increasing and stabilizing the productivity of pastures. It is necessary to evaluate its joint effect with grazing. Two irrigation thresholds were evaluated, with entry of animals. The treatments were: frequent irrigation (30% depleted), spaced irrigation (65% depleted) and rainfed. The experimental design was complete randomized blocks, and 30 months of evaluation. The average annual yield of irrigated alfalfa was 25,333 and 23,177 kg DM ha-1, first and second year of evaluation, respectively. The accumulated production (30 months) did not show a significant difference between the irrigated treatments, but it did between irrigated and rainfed. In the last summer-autumn, the yield of all treatments fell to 8660 kg DM ha-1 (irrigated) and 1756 kg DM ha-1 (rainfed). Seasonal productivity indicates the con-venience of irrigating alfalfa in summer since the yield increased 43% in the second year and 4.3 times more in the last year. Furthermore, after the extreme summer drought, in the following autumn, the irrigated treatments yielded 7 times more than the rainfed. Management with spaced irrigation and irrigation depth that do not return the soil to its field capacity increases the effectiveness of precipitation, saving water and energy allocated to irrigation. The apparent density increased towards the end of the experiment as a result of grazing, however, there was no difference between the evaluated irrigation managements. |
URI / Handle: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12381/3396 |
Recursos relacionados en REDI: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12381/3395 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12381/3397 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12381/3398 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12381/3399 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12381/3400 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12381/3401 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12381/3402 https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12381/3403 |
DOI: | https://doi.org/10.31285/AGRO.28.1422 |
Institución responsable del proyecto: | Universidad de la República. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Suelos y Aguas. Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria. INIA Las Brujas. |
Financiadores: | Agencia Nacional de Investigación e Innovación Ministerio de Ganadería, Agricultura y Pesca Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria |
Identificador ANII: | FSA_1_2018_152514 |
Nivel de Acceso: | Acceso abierto |
Licencia CC: | Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional. (CC BY) |
Aparece en las colecciones: | Publicaciones de ANII |
Archivos en este ítem:
archivo | Descripción | Tamaño | Formato | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2730-5066--1422.pdf | Descargar | 826.82 kB | Adobe PDF |
Las obras en REDI están protegidas por licencias Creative Commons.
Por más información sobre los términos de esta publicación, visita:
Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional. (CC BY)