Abstract
Among the cereal grains, paddy has the first place in production quantity and the second place after wheat in cultivated lands. Quite a small portion of paddy straw is used in animal feeding and the rest is burnt on fields, thus generating serious damages to the environment and soil. The present study investigated grain yield, straw yield, and straw quality of 12 paddy cultivars originating from different parts of the world. Experiments were conducted over the paddy fields of a farmer in Bafra town of Samsun province located in Kızılırmak Delta of Turkey in 2018 and 2019 growing seasons in randomized blocks design with four replications. There were significant differences in investigated parameters of the cultivars. Grain yield varied between 56.29–100.03 t ha−1, straw yield 92.19–135.43 t ha−1, crude protein 5.21–7.94%, ADF (acid detergent fiber) 65.00–69.92%, NDF (neutral detergent fiber) 37.92–41.24% and relative feed value 77.86–82.64. Biplot analysis revealed that Halilbey cultivar was prominent for investigated parameters. In terms of relative feed value, paddy straw was classified as “3rd quality”. Such use of paddy straw could prevent damages to the environment, provide economic contributions to growers and generate a sustainable paddy-farming system.
Zusammenfassung
Unter den Getreidearten nimmt Reis den ersten Platz bei der Produktionsmenge und den zweiten Platz nach Weizen bei den Anbauflächen ein. Nur ein kleiner Teil des Reisstrohs wird als Tierfutter verwendet, der Rest wird auf den Feldern verbrannt, was der Umwelt und dem Boden schweren Schaden zufügt. In der vorliegenden Studie wurden Kornertrag, Strohertrag und Strohqualität von 12 Reissorten aus verschiedenen Teilen der Welt untersucht. Die Versuche wurden auf den Reisfeldern eines Landwirts in der Stadt Bafra in der Provinz Samsun im Kızılırmak-Delta der Türkei in den Vegetationsperioden 2018 und 2019 in einem randomisierten Blockdesign mit vier Wiederholungen durchgeführt. Es gab signifikante Unterschiede in den untersuchten Parametern der Sorten. Der Kornertrag variierte zwischen 56,29–100,03 t ha−1, der Strohertrag zwischen 92,19–135,43 t ha−1, das Rohprotein zwischen 5,21–7,94 %, die ADF (acid detergent fiber) zwischen 65,00–69,92 %, die NDF (neutral detergent fiber) zwischen 37,92–41,24 % und der relative Futterwert zwischen 77,86–82,64. Die Biplot-Analyse ergab, dass die Sorte Halilbey bei den untersuchten Parametern führend war. In Bezug auf den relativen Futterwert wurde Reisstroh als „3. Qualität“ eingestuft. Eine solche Verwendung von Reisstroh könnte Umweltschäden verhindern, einen wirtschaftlichen Beitrag für die Landwirte leisten und ein nachhaltiges Reisanbausystem schaffen.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Akay H, Sezer I, Mut Z, Deng\(\dot {\mathrm{i}}\)z O (2017) Yield and quality performance of some paddy cultivars grown in left bank of Bafra plain. KSU J Agric Naturel 20:297–302. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksudobil.349264
Akkılıç M, Surmen S (1979) Feed ingredients and animal nutrition laboratory book. Ankara University Press, Ankara
Ayaşan T, Ulger I, Ozsoy B (2019) Determination of feeding value of some rice varieties. Turkish J Agric Nat Sci 6(3):405–409. https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.595190
Ball DM, Hoveland CS, Lacefield GD (1996) Forage quality in southern forages. Potash & Phosphate Institute, Norcross Georgia, pp 124–132
Canbolat O (2012) Comparison of in vitro gas production, organic matter digestibility, relative feed value and metabolizable energy contents of some cereal forages. J Fac Veterinary Med Kafkas Univ 18(4):571–577
Concon JM, Soltess D (1973) Rapid micro Kjeldahl digestion of cereal grains and other biological materials. Anal Biochem 53(1):35–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(73)90405-3
FAO (2020) Statistical databases. http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/default.aspx#ancr. Accessed 10 Aug 2020
Idikut L (2009) The investigation of grain yield and yield components of some rice genotypes in Kahramanmaras conditions. KSU J Agric Naturel 12(1):62–65
JMP (2007) JMP User Guide, Release 7. SAS Institute Inc, Cary
Karabulut A, Filya I (2012) Feed knowledge and feed technology, 5th edn. Uludag University Faculty Lecture Notes No: 67 Bursa Turkey
Karnoven T, Peltonen J, Kivi E (1991) The effect of northern climate conditions on sprouting damage of wheat grains. Acta Agric Scand 41:55–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/00015129109438583
Kaya S (2008) Relative feed value and relative forage quality in forage evaluation. Turkish J Sci Rev 1(1):59–64
Kutlu HR, Celik L (2010) Feed knowledge and feed technology, 2nd edn. Adana. Cukurova Uni. Fac. of Agriculture Textbooks Pub. No: A‑86
MAFF (1984) Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, London
Maneerat W, Prasanpanich S, Tumwasorn S, Laudadio V, Tufarelli V (2015) Evaluating agro-industrial by-products as dietary roughage source on growth performance of fattening steers. Saudi J Biol Sci 22(5):580–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.01.015
Matías J, Cruz V, García A, González D (2019) Evaluation of rice straw yield, fibre composition and collection under Mediterranean conditions. Acta Technol Agric 22(2):43–47. https://doi.org/10.2478/ata-2019-0008
Mut Z, Akay H, Erbaş ÖD (2015) Hay yield and quality of oat (Avena sativa L.) genotypes of worldwide origin. Int J Plant Prod 9:507–522
Phakachoed N, Lounglawan P, Suksombat W (2012) Effects of xylanase supplementation on ruminal digestibility in fistulated non-lactating dairy cows fed rice straw. Livest Sci 149(1–2):104–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2012.07.002
Pinkerton B (2005) Forage quality. Clemson Uni. Cooperative Extension Ser. Forage fact sheet 2
Rohweder DA, Barnes R, Jorgensen N (1978) Proposed hay grading standart based on laboratory analyses for evaluating quality. J Anim Sci 47:747–759. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1978.473747x
Sehu A, Sakine Y, Onol AG (1996) The in vivo digestibility coefficients and rumen degradability characteristics of some cereal straws. Ankara Univ Fac Veterinary J 43:469–477
Sezer I, Koycu C (1999) A research on the determination of rice varieties and lines (Oryza sativa L.) that can be grown in Kızılırmak valley. Proceedings of the Turkey III. Field Crops, Adana, November 15–20, pp 150–157
Sezer I, Akay H, Oner F, Sahin M (2012) Paddy production systems. Turkish J Sci Rev 5(2):6–11
Sezer I, Senocak HS, Akay H (2017) Comparison of transplanting and broadcasting methods in some paddy cultivars. KSU J Agric Naturel 20:292–296. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksudobil.349263
Surek H (2002) Paddy farming. Hasat publishing, Istanbul
Van Dyke NJ, Anderson PM (2000) Interpreting a forage analysis. Alabama cooperative extension Circular ANR-890
Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA (1991) Methodsfordietaryfiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 74(10):3583–3597. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
Weiss WP, Conrad HR, Pierre StNR (1992) A theoretically-based model for predicting total digestible, nutrient values of forages and concentrates. Animal Feed Sci Technol 39(1–2):95–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(92)90034-4
Welch RW (1977) A micro-method for the estimation of fat content and composition in seed crops. J Sci Food Agric 28(7):635–638. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2740280710
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
H. Akay declares that he has no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Akay, H. Grain and Straw Yield of Paddy Cultivars and Feed Quality Traits of Paddy Straw. Gesunde Pflanzen 74, 549–560 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10343-022-00630-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10343-022-00630-5