This article was downloaded by: [Laurentian University]On: 06 October 2014, At: 01:29Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: MortimerHouse, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B — Soil &Plant SciencePublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/sagb20

Forage qualities, forage yields and seed yieldsof some legume–triticale mixtures under rainfedconditionsYasar Karadag a & Ugur Buyukburc ba Faculty of Agriculture , Gaziosmanpasa University , 60240, Tokat, Turkeyb Faculty of Agriculture , Harran University , Sanliurfa, TurkeyPublished online: 01 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: Yasar Karadag & Ugur Buyukburc (2004) Forage qualities, forage yields and seed yields of somelegume–triticale mixtures under rainfed conditions, Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B — Soil & Plant Science,54:3, 140-148, DOI: 10.1080/09064710310015481

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09064710310015481

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose ofthe Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shallnot be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Forage Qualities, Forage Yields and SeedYields of Some Legume�/TriticaleMixtures Under Rainfed Conditions

Introduction

Poor rainfall distribution and heavy grazing cause

pasture yield and quality outcomes that severely limit

animal production in many regions of Turkey (Buyuk-

burc, 1993). Traditionally, summer grazing and cereal

straw feeding in winter have been the major sources of

ruminant nutrition in Turkey (Buyukburc, 1993).

Therefore, it has been necessary to find alternative

systems of nutrition to improve animal performance,

and one system includes the improvement of output

from fodder plants. Annual legumes and cereals such

as hairy vetch, Hungarian vetch, grasspea, oat, barley

and triticale are the most viable fodder sources.

Environmental conditions of the rainfed areas allow

the possibilities of higher yield and better quality

Karadag, Y. and Buyukburc, U. (Faculty of Agriculture, Gaziosmanpasa

University, 60240, Tokat, Turkey and Faculty of Agriculture, Harran

University, Sanliurfa, Turkey). Forage qualities, forage yields and seed

yields of some legume-triticale mixtures under rainfed conditions. Accepted

June 26, 2003. Acta Agric. Scand., Sect. B, Soil and Plant Sci. 54: 140�/

148, 2004. # 2004 Taylor & Francis.

Triticale (Triticosecale Wittmack) grown with legume has a better forage

quality and greater yield potential than triticale grown alone. The

objective of the study was to determine the suitable mixture rate of

legume and triticale grown under the rainfed conditions in the northeast

of Turkey. Field experiments, designed in a factorial randomized

complete block with three replications, were carried out during 1998�/

1999 and 1999�/2000 starting in the first week of November, 1998 and

1999. The highest dry matter yield (10.96 t ha�1) was obtained from the

mixture including 50% Hungarian vetch (Vicia pannonica Crantz.) and

50% triticale (Triticosecale Wittmack). Decreasing the seed rate of

triticale in mixtures decreased dry matter yield while it increased the

crude protein concentration of the hay mixture. The mixtures of 50%

grasspea line 38 (Lathyrus sativus L.) and 50% triticale (Triticosecale

Wittmack) and 50% hairy vetch and 50% triticale produced the highestseed and crude protein yield. Similarly, 50% Hungarian vetch (Vicia

pannonica Crantz.) and 50% triticale (Triticosecale Wittmack) mixture

produced the highest crude fiber and ash yield. Pure hairy vetch (Vicia

villosa Roth.) and grasspea line 38 (Lathyrus sativus L.) yielded the

maximum amount of NO3� -N to soil, and the highest plant concen-

tration of crude protein, respectively. The mixtures outyielded the pure

sowings with respect to dry matter (RYT�1.58) and grain yield

(RYT�1.76).

*Corresponding author

Yasar Karadag1,* andUgur Buyukburc2

1Faculty of Agriculture,Gaziosmanpasa University, 60240,Tokat, Turkey and 2Faculty ofAgriculture, Harran University,Sanliurfa, Turkey

Key words: grasspea-triticale mixture,forage quality, seed yield, vetch-triticale mixture.

DOI: 10.1080/09064710310015481140

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lau

rent

ian

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

1:29

06

Oct

ober

201

4

forages in rotational systems (Osman & Nersoyan,

1985). Forage quality of cereal hay is usually lower

than that required to meet satisfactory production

levels of many classes of livestock. Annual legume-

cereal mixtures are important protein and carbohy-

drate sources for livestock (Dovel & Bohle, 1997).

Roberts et al. (1989) reported that annual legume-cereal mixtures have an important role in arable

systems in maintaining soil fertility and regulating

the crop specific weeds, diseases and pests. In addition,

the nitrogen requirement of triticale is reduced by

growing a combination of legumes with triticale, since

legumes such as hairy vetch are able to biologically fix

more than 200 kg N/ha/year (Mitchell & Teel, 1977).

Therefore, hairy vetch contains high concentrations ofcrude protein (Ebelhar et al., 1984). Growing winter

annual legumes in mixtures with winter sown small

grain crops also improves forage quality.

The objective of this study was to determine the

optimum mix of legume and triticale grown under

rainfed conditions in the northeast of Turkey.

Material and methods

This study was conducted at the Field Crops Depart-

ment of the Agricultural Faculty, Gaziosmanpasa

University, (40813?�/40822? N, 3681?�/36840? E, altitude

623 m) in 1998/99 and 1999/00. Some climatic data forthe trial area are given in Table 1. Soils in the study

area were alkaline (pH 8.08), medium in calcium

carbonate content (11.3%), poor in organic matter

(1.42%) and P content (61.5 kg/ha P2O5), but rich in K

content (549.0 kg/ha K2O). The mixtures studied in

the research were pure grasspea line 452, pure grasspea

line 38, pure hairy vetch, pure Hungarian vetch, pure

triticale, 1/4 grasspea and 3/4 triticale, 1/2 grasspea and1/2 triticale, 3/4 grasspea and 1/4 triticale, 1/4 vetch

and 3/4 triticale, 1/2 vetch and 1/2 triticale, 3/4 vetch

and 1/4 triticale. In the research, local cultivars of

hairy vetch (Vicia villosa Roth.) called ‘‘Menemen-

79’’, Hungarian vetch (Vicia pannonica Crantz.) called

‘‘Ege Beyazi’’, triticale (Triticosecale Wittmack.)

called ‘‘Tatlicak-97’’and grasspea lines 452 and 38

(Lathyrus sativus L.) were used as plant materials.

Field experiments started on 4th and 5th of November,

1998 and 1999 and were designed in a factorial

randomized complete block with three replications.

Plot size was 5 m�/1.75 m, and half of each plot was

used to measure the forage yield and the other half to

measure the grain yield. Sowing rates of pure grasspea,

vetch and triticale were 120 kg/ha, 80 kg/ha and 200

kg/ha, respectively. N-P fertilizer, 30 kg/ha N and 80

kg/ha P2O5, was uniformly applied to the soil before

sowing.Forage was harvested when legume plants reached

the beginning of the pod formation stage. Subsamples

were dried at 708C for 48 h, to determine dry matter

yield. The rest of the plots were harvested at maturity

for grain yields. Relative yield totals (RYT) for the

forage and seed yields in the mixtures were calculated

by using formula R�/O/M, (R�/relative yield, O�/

yield of a species in the mixture, M�/yield of a species

sown alone), RYT�/RX�/RY, (RYT�/relative yield

total, RX�/relative yield of X species, RY�/relative

yield of Y species) (Hatipoglu & Tukel, 1997; Rauber

et al., 2000). Crude protein, crude fiber and crude ash

analyses were determined on ground subsamples of

legume and triticale hays. Nitrogen content of hay was

determined by micro-Kjeldahl procedure described by

Nelson & Sommers (1980), and crude protein concen-

tration was calculated (N�/6.25). AOAC (1984) was

used for crude fiber and crude ash concentrations.

Crude protein, crude fiber and crude ash yields were

calculated by multiplying dry matter yield with crude

protein concentration, crude fiber concentration and

crude ash concentrations, respectively. Soils were

sampled from each plot at 60 cm with a hydraulically

driven probe in 1999 and 2000. Soil NO3�-N was

determined by electrode method on water extracts of

air-dried samples (Dahnke, 1980). Analysis of variance

and Duncan analysis for mean comparisons were

conducted as outlined by Gomez & Gomez (1984).

Results from the two years were combined and

analyzed as a factorial randomized complete block.

Table 1. Climatic data of the experimental area

Years Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Ap. May Jun. Jul. Tot/Mean

Mean 1998�/99 6.3 4.5 4.1 6.2 7.9 12.8 16.1 20.7 23.7 11.4temperature 1999�/00 7.3 5.2 �/0.8 0.5 5.7 15.0 14.9 18.7 24.6 10.1(8C) 1962�/88 7.0 3.3 1.4 2.7 6.9 12.5 16.4 19.6 22.0 10.2

Rainfall 1998�/99 29 72 14 53 35 68 47 35 2 355(mm) 1999�/00 24 32 56 62 37 92 89 15 6 413

1950�/88 48 47 41 33 40 62 61 41 11 384

Data of Rural Services Research Institute, Tokat, 2000.

Legume�/triticale mixtures in Turkey

141

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lau

rent

ian

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

1:29

06

Oct

ober

201

4

Results and discussion

Dry matter yield

Dry matter yields of the pure sowings and the mixtures

were significantly different (P B/0.01) in both years

(Table 2). In the first year, the highest dry matter yield

(10.56 t ha�1) was obtained from the mixture contain-ing 50% grasspea line 452 and 50% triticale, and the

lowest yield (1.69 t ha�1) was obtained from the pure

grasspea line 452 (Table 2). Dry matter yield varied

from 3.18 t ha�1 to 14.18 t ha�1 in the second year.

According to the two-year average, the lowest dry

matter yield (2.75 t ha�1) was obtained from the pure

grasspea line 452, and the highest dry matter yield

(10.96 t ha�1) was obtained from the mixture contain-ing 50% Hungarian vetch and 50% triticale (Table 3).

Dyachenko (1979) and Osman & Nersoyan (1985)

have indicated that the most suitable mixtures for

forage production were composed of 50% legumes and

50% cereals. However, Soya et al. (1991) and Qamar et

al. (1999a) reported poorer results from the same

mixtures. These differences may have arisen from

environmental conditions such as precipitation andtemperature recorded during the vegetative cycle of

growth, and cultivars in the experiment. Precipitation

and temperature values in the vegetative growth period

of our study were higher, resulting in higher yields than

in the above experiments. Due to the higher precipita-

tion in 2000, the mean dry matter yields of mixtures

were higher than those in 1999 (Table 2). The mixtures

gave higher yields than the pure sowings. Similarresults were reported by Rynolds et al. (1982), Osman

& Nersoyan (1985), Al-Masri (1998) and Rauber et al.

(2000). Average dry matter yield of the pure triticale

plots was not statistically different from the average

dry matter yield of the mixtures. Robinson (1969)

reported similar results from oat-annual legume mix-

tures.

Seed yield

Seed yields of pure and the mixture sowings were

significantly different in both years (Table 2). Seed

yields varied from 0.84 t ha�1 to 5.13 t ha�1 in 1999,

and from 0.38 t ha�1 to 6.28 t ha�1 in 2000 (Table 2).

The average seed yield varied from 0.61 t ha�1 for pure

hairy vetch to 5.69 t ha�1 for 50% grasspea line 38 and

50% triticale mixture (Table 3). Rauber et al. (2000)

found higher results from the same treatments. En-vironmental conditions such as precipitation and

temperature, and cultivars in the field experiments

could cause such a difference. The mean seed yield in

the first year (3.44 t ha�1) was lower than that of the

second year (4.37 t ha�1) (Table 2). However, pure

stands gave generally lower yields in the second year

than those in the first year. In the second year, higher

rainfall, especially in April and May, gave rise to

higher plant height in the legumes. Higher plant height

resulted in the collapse of the legume plants, and

therefore pure stands of legumes gave lower seed yields

in the second year. In contrast to this, the companion

crop, triticale, in the mixtures prevented the legumes

from collapsing, and as a result the legumes had higherseed yields in the mixtures than those in the pure

stands. On the other hand, because of the lower

rainfall during June in the second year, the seed yield

of triticale in pure stands was lower.

Soil NO3�-N amount

Significant differences were found in the amount of

NO3�-N transferred to the soil by legumes (Table 2).

Soil NO3�-N amount varied from 0.010 t ha�1 to

0.051 t ha�1 in the first year and from 0.032 t ha�1 to

0.100 t ha�1 in the second year (Table 2). Average soil

NO3�-N amount varied from 0.021 t ha�1 for 25%

grasspea line 38 and 75% triticale mixture to 0.076 t

ha�1 for pure hairy vetch (Table 3). Pure legume

sowings transferred higher amounts of NO3�-N to the

soil than the mixtures. The amount of NO3�-N

transferred to soil by legumes decreased as the triticale

rate in mixture increased.

Crude protein concentration

Differences in crude protein concentrations were

significant between the pure and the mixed sowings

(Table 2). The lowest crude protein concentration was

obtained from pure triticale, while the highest crudeprotein concentration was obtained from the pure

grasspea line 38 in both years (Table 2). According to

the two-year average, the pure grasspea line 38 had the

highest crude protein concentration averaging 20.73%

while the pure triticale had the lowest, averaging 8.09%

(Table 3). The mean crude protein concentration in

2000 was less than the previous year (Table 4) (due to

the higher precipitation in 2000). Cox & Atkins (1979)have indicated that higher precipitation increased the

carbohydrate/protein ratio. Since crude protein con-

centrations of legumes are higher than cereals, crude

protein concentrations of the mixtures increased as the

legume rate in the mixture increased (Droushiotis,

1989; Roberts et al., 1989; Al-Masri, 1998; Qamar et

al., 1999b).

Crude protein yield

Significant differences were found in crude protein

yields in both experimental years (Table 2). Crude

protein yield ranged from 0.35 t ha�1 to 0.98 t ha�1 in

1999, and from 0.45 t ha�1 to 1.35 t ha�1 in 2000

(Table 2). The mean crude protein yield varied from

0.50 t ha�1 for pure grasspea line 452 to 1.05 t ha�1

Y. Karadag and U. Buyukburc

142

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lau

rent

ian

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

1:29

06

Oct

ober

201

4

Table 2. Dry matter yield (DMY), seed yield (SY), soil NO3�-N amount (NO3

�-N), crude protein concentration (CPC) and crude protein yield (CPY) for pure andmixture sowings at Tokat in 1998�/1999 and 1999�/2000

1999 2000

Pure and mixture sowings DMY (t ha�1) SY (t ha�1) NO3�-N (t ha�1) CPC (%) CPY (t ha�1) DMY (t ha�1) SY (t ha�1) NO3

�-N (t ha�1) CPC (%) CPY (t ha�1)

100% Grasspea line 452 1.69 d** 1.14 c** 0.050 a** 20.70 ab** 0.35 g** 3.81 cd** 0.90 d** 0.034 b* 17.27 ab** 0.66 g�/j**100% Grasspea line 38 1.85 d 0.98 c 0.051 a 21.87 a 0.40 g 3.75 cd 1.21cd 0.067 ab 19.59 a 0.73 f�/i100% Hairy vetch 3.56 cd 0.84 c 0.048 a 19.23 bc 0.68 def 3.18 d 0.38 d 0.100 a 17.17 ab 0.55 ij100% Hungarian vetch 4.31 bcd 1.18 c 0.040 ab 17.43 c 0.75 c�/f 3.76 cd 0.63 d 0.069 ab 16.30 b 0.61 hij100% Triticale 9.69 a 4.41 ab �/ 8.82 ef 0.86 a�/e 6.06 bcd 3.14 bc �/ 7.35 c 0.45 j75% Grasspea line 452 6.81 abc 3.66 ab 0.038 abc 9.42 ef 0.64 f 10.72 ab 5.78 a 0.033 b 9.76 c 1.01 b�/e25% Triticale50% Grasspea line 452 10.56 a 4.66 ab 0.019 cde 9.04 ef 0.95 ab 9.90 abc 4.54 ab 0.044 b 8.95 c 0.88 def50% Triticale25% Grasspea line 452 9.78 a 4.78 ab 0.016 de 8.97 ef 0.88 abc 10.30 ab 5.83 a 0.037 b 7.95 c 0.82 e�/h75% Triticale75% Grasspea line 38 8.05 ab 3.73 ab 0.034 a�/d 9.54 ef 0.76 b�/f 9.72 abc 5.82 a 0.054 ab 9.65 c 0.94 c�/f25% Triticale50% Grasspea line 38 7.34 abc 5.13 a 0.018 cde 9.00 ef 0.66 f 12.24 ab 6.24 a 0.056 ab 9.51 c 1.16 abc50% Tritilcale25% Grasspea line 38 9.73 a 3.84 ab 0.010 e 8.19 f 0.80 a�/f 10.32 ab 5.86 a 0.032 b 8.01 c 0.83 efg75% Triticale75% Hairy vetch 7.81 ab 3.46 b 0.023 b�/e 11.93 d 0.90 abc 10.85 ab 5.06 ab 0.062 ab 10.21 c 1.09 bcd25% Triticale50% Hairy vetch 8.10 ab 3.60 b 0.018 cde 12.18 d 0.98 a 11.75 ab 6.19 a 0.064 ab 9.71 c 1.12 bc50% Triticale25% Hairy vetch 9.04 a 3.82 ab 0.012 e 9.58 ef 0.87 a�/d 12.00 ab 6.18 a 0.042 b 8.39 c 1.01 b�/e75% Triticale75% Hungarian vetch 6.86 abc 4.14 ab 0.021 b�/e 10.98 de 0.75 c�/f 12.78 a 6.28 a 0.065 ab 9.58 c 1.22 ab25% Triticale50% Hungarian vetch 9.11 a 4.79 ab 0.016 de 10.07 def 0.90 abc 12.80 a 5.16 ab 0.073 ab 8.90 c 1.14 abc50% Triticale25% Hungarian vetch 6.53 abc 4.36 ab 0.010 e 10.32 def 0.67 ef 14.18 a 5.15 ab 0.063 ab 9.54 c 1.35 a75% Triticale

Mean 7.11 b� 3.44 b� 0.027 b�� 12.19 a�� 0.75 b�� 9.30 a 4.37 a 0.056 a 11.05 b 0.91 aCV (%) 21.67 16.64 22.65 5.36 10.30 26.67 20.15 25.33 7.97 9.52LSD 3.44 1.28 0.018 2.01 0.17 5.55 1.97 0.046 2.71 0.20

* Values with the same letters (within a column) do not differ significantly (PB/0.05) according to DUNCAN test.** Values with the same letters (within a column) do not differ significantly (PB/0.01) according to DUNCAN test.� Values with the same letters (within a line) do not differ significantly (PB/0.05) according to DUNCAN test.�� Values with the same letters (within a line) do not differ significantly (PB/0.01) according to DUNCAN test.

Leg

um

e�/tritica

lem

ixtu

resin

Tu

rkey

143

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lau

rent

ian

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

1:29

06

Oct

ober

201

4

for 50% hairy vetch and 50% triticale (Table 3). Theseresults are higher than the findings of some researchers

(Roberts et al., 1989; Soya et al., 1991; Qamar et al.,

1999b). Environmental conditions and cultivars used

in the trials could explain such a difference, and high

total dry matter yield could be another reason. Dry

matter yields in our trial were higher, resulting in

higher crude protein yield than in the above experi-

ments. Crude protein yields of the mixtures werehigher than the pure sowings, and the mixture of

50% legume and 50% triticale yielded more than pure

sowings and other mixtures. Qamar et al. (1999b)

reported that the lowest crude protein yield was

obtained from the pure legumes.

Crude fiber concentration

Crude fiber concentrations of the pure and the mixture

sowings were significant (P B/0.01) in both years

(Table 4). The highest crude fiber concentration

(23.73%) was obtained from the pure triticale whilethe lowest (17.40%) was obtained from the pure

grasspea line 452 in the first year (Table 4). Crude

fiber concentration varied from 16.93% to 21.27% in

the second year (Table 4). According to the two-year

average, the pure triticale had the highest crude fiber

concentration, averaging 22.50% while the pure grass-

pea line 452 had the lowest, averaging 17.17% (Table

5).

Crude fiber yield

Significant differences were observed for crude fiber

yield in 1999 and 2000 (Table 4). Crude fiber yields

varied from 0.29 t ha�1 to 2.47 t ha�1 in the first year,

and from 0.58 t ha�1 to 2.94 t ha�1 in the second

year (Table 4). Two-year results indicated that 50%

Hungarian vetch-50% triticale mixture produced the

Table 3. Two-year summary of dry matter yield (DMY), seed yield (SY), soil NO3�-N amount (NO3

�-N), crudeprotein concentration (CPC) and crude protein yield (CPY) in the pure and mixture sowings

Pure and mixture sowings DMY (t ha�1) SY (t ha�1) NO3�-N (t ha�1) CPC (%) CPY (t ha�1)

100% Grasspea line 452 2.75 b* 1.02 d* 0.042 abc* 18.98 b* 0.50 e*100% Grasspea line 38 2.80 b 1.09 d 0.059 ab 20.73 a 0.56 de100% Hairy vetch 3.37 b 0.61 d 0.076 a 18.20 bc 0.62 de100% Hungarian vetch 4.03 b 0.91 d 0.054 abc 16.87 c 0.68 d100% Triticale 7.88 a 3.78 c �/ 8.09 f 0.65 d75% Grasspea line 452 8.76 a 4.72 abc 0.035 bc 9.59 def 0.82 c25% Triticale50% Grasspea line 452 10.23 a 4.60 abc 0.032 bc 8.99 ef 0.92 abc50% Triticale25% Grasspea line 452 10.04 a 5.31 ab 0.026 bc 8.46 ef 0.85 bc75% Triticale75% Grasspea line 38 8.89 a 4.77 abc 0.044 abc 9.59 def 0.85 bc25% Triticale50% Grasspea line 38 9.79 a 5.69 a 0.037 bc 9.26 def 0.91 abc50% Triticale25% Grasspea line 38 10.03 a 4.85 abc 0.021 c 8.10 f 0.81 c75% Triticale75% Hairy vetch 9.33 a 4.26 bc 0.042 abc 11.07 d 1.00 a25% Triticale50% Hairy vetch 9.92 a 4.90 abc 0.041 abc 10.95 d 1.05 a50% Triticale25% Hairy vetch 10.52 a 5.00 abc 0.027 bc 8.99 ef 0.94 abc75% Triticale75% Hungarian vetch 9.82 a 5.21 ab 0.043 abc 10.28 de 0.99 ab25% Triticale50% Hungarian vetch 10.96 a 4.97 abc 0.044 abc 9.48 def 1.02 a50% Triticale25% Hungarian vetch 10.36 a 4.75 abc 0.036 bc 9.93 def 1.01 a75% Triticale

Mean 8.20 3.91 0.041 11.62 0.83CV (%) 25.16 19.02 24.82 6.18 9.88LSD 3.16 1.14 0.031 1.64 0.13

* Values with the same letters (within a column) do not differ significantly (PB/0.01) according to DUNCAN test.

Y. Karadag and U. Buyukburc

144

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lau

rent

ian

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

1:29

06

Oct

ober

201

4

highest crude fiber yield (2.40 t ha�1), whereas the

pure grasspea line 452 had the lowest crude fiber yield

(0.47 t ha�1) (Table 5). These results are higher than

the findings of Soya et al. (1991), and the differences in

crude fiber yield may have originated from the

cultivars used in the field experiments and the amount

of phosphorus fertilizer used. Many researchers have

reported that the most important factor affecting the

chemical content of fodder in forages is genotype

(Hacker & Minson, 1981; Marten, 1985). Also,

Miskovic et al. (1977) have reported that phosphorus

fertilizers in legumes affected the chemical composi-

tion of fodder positively. As a result, crude

fiber concentrations increased. Soya et al. (1991)

used 60 kg ha�1 P2O5 in their experiments whereas

80 kg ha�1 P2O5 was applied in this study, and the

difference may be one of the reasons for high crude

fiber yields.

Crude ash concentration

There were differences between the pure and the mixture

sowings for crude ash concentration in bothyears (Table

4). Crude ash concentrations varied between 10.83%

and 15.60% in the first year and between 8.77% and

11.43% in the second year (Table 4). Average crude ash

concentration varied from 9.82% for pure triticale to

13.52% for pure Hungarian vetch (Table 5). These

Table 4. Crude fiber concentration (CFC), crude fiber yield (CFY), crude ash concentration (CAC) and crude ashyield (CAY) for pure and mixture sowings at Tokat in 1998�/1999 and 1999�/2000

1999 2000

Pure and mixturesowings

CFC(%)

CFY(t ha�1)

CAC(%)

CAY(t ha�1)

CFC(%)

CFY(t ha�1)

CAC(%)

CAY(t ha�1)

100% Grasspea line 452 17.40 d* 0.29 f* 11.90 cd* 0.20 h* 16.93 d* 0.65 e* 10.60 ab* 0.40 ef*100% Grasspea line 38 18.97 c 0.35 f 11.30 cd 0.21 h 17.20 d 0.65 e 10.33 abc 0.39 ef100% Hairy vetch 19.60 c 0.70 ef 13.03 b 0.46 g 18.27 cd 0.58 e 10.67 a 0.34 f100% Hungarian vetch 20.87 b 0.90 e 15.60 a 0.67 f 19.20 bc 0.72 e 11.43 a 0.42 ef100% Triticale 23.73 a 2.30 ab 10.87 d 1.06 ab 21.27 a 1.29 d 8.77 d 0.53 e75% Grasspea line 452 23.22 a 1.58 d 10.92 cd 0.74 ef 20.21 ab 2.18 bc 9.21 cd 0.98 cd25% Triticale50% Grasspea line 452 23.42 a 2.47 a 10.83 d 1.14 a 20.58 ab 2.04 c 9.07 cd 0.90 d50% Triticale25% Grasspea line 452 23.65 a 2.31 ab 10.88 d 1.06 ab 21.01 ab 2.16 bc 8.88 d 0.91 d75% Triticale75% Grasspea line 38 23.47 a 1.89 bcd 10.89 d 0.88 b�/f 20.50 ab 1.99 c 9.06 cd 0.88 d25% Triticale50% Grasspea line 38 23.67 a 1.74 cd 10.88 d 0.80 def 20.55 ab 2.52 abc 9.05 cd 1.11 bc50% Tritilcale25% Grasspea line 38 23.65 a 2.30 ab 10.88 d 1.06 ab 21.05 ab 2.17 bc 8.85 d 0.91 d75% Triticale75% Hairy vetch 22.50 a 1.77 cd 11.52 cd 0.89 b�/f 20.39 ab 2.22 bc 9.32 cd 1.00 cd25% Triticale50% Hairy vetch 22.65 a 1.84 bcd 11.43 cd 0.93 a�/e 20.55 ab 2.42 bc 9.23 cd 1.08 bc50% Triticale25% Hairy vetch 23.43 a 2.12 abc 11.03 cd 1.00 a�/d 20.95 ab 2.51 abc 8.97 d 1.08 bc75% Triticale75% Hungarian vetch 23.01 a 1.58 d 12.06 bc 0.83 c�/f 20.76 ab 2.65 ab 9.43 bcd 1.21 ab25% Triticale50% Hungarian vetch 23.32 a 2.13 abc 11.55 cd 1.04 abc 20.91 ab 2.68 ab 9.23 cd 1.18 b50% Triticale25% Hungarian vetch 23.23 a 1.59 d 11.70 cd 0.76 ef 20.76 ab 2.94 a 9.42 bcd 1.34 a75% Triticale

Mean 22.34 a��1.64 b�� 11.60 a��0.81b� 20.06 b 1.90 a 9.50 b 0.86 aCV (%) 2.15 12.25 3.87 10.92 3.54 10.91 5.34 7.78LSD 1.07 0.45 1.00 0.20 1.59 0.46 1.14 0.14

* Values with the same letters (within a column) do not differ significantly (PB/0.01) according to DUNCAN test.� Values with the same letters (within a line) do not differ significantly (PB/0.05) according to DUNCAN test.�� Values with the same letters (within a line) do not differ significantly (PB/0.01) according to DUNCAN test.

Legume�/triticale mixtures in Turkey

145

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lau

rent

ian

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

1:29

06

Oct

ober

201

4

results are higher than findings of Konak et al. (1997)

and the differences may have been caused by thecultivars used in the field experiments.

Crude ash yield

Differences in crude ash yield of the pure and the

mixture sowings were significant in 1999 and 2000

(Table 4). In 1999, the highest crude ash yield (1.14 t

ha�1) was obtained from the 50% grasspea line 452 and

50% triticale mixture, while the lowest yield (0.20 t

ha�1) was obtained from the pure grasspea line 452(Table 4). In 2000, the highest and the lowest crude ash

yields (1.34 t ha�1 and 0.34 t ha�1, respectively) were

obtained from the 25% Hungarian vetch and 75%

triticale and the pure hairy vetch (Table 4). The mean

crude ashyield varied from 0.30 t ha�1 for pure grasspea

line 452 and grasspea line 38 to 1.11 t ha�1 for 50%

Hungarian vetch and 50% triticale mixture (Table 5).

The results are higher than findings of Soya et al. (1991),and Konak et al. (1997), and again may be caused by the

different cultivars used in the trials, and the amount of

phosphorus fertilizer used. It is interesting that the

cultivars used by Konak et al. (1997) were cv. Beaguelita

and cv. Eronga of triticale and cv. Kubilay-82 of

common vetch, while the cultivars used in this study

were cv. Menemen-79 of hairy vetch, cv. Ege Beyazi of

Hungarian vetch, cv. Tatlicak-97 of triticale and line 452and 38 of grasspea. Moreover, it was determined that

phosphorus fertilizers in legumes affected the chemical

composition of fodder positively. As a result, crude ash

concentration which contains mineral matters has

increased (Miskovic et al. 1977).

Relative yield total values (RYT-values)

Relative yield total values from the experiment in two

years are presented in Table 6. In the data averaged

Table 5. Two-year summary of crude fiber concentration (CFC), crude fiber yield (CFY), crude ash concentration(CAC) and crude ash yield (CAY) in the pure and mixture sowings

Pure and mixture sowings CFC (%) CFY (t ha�1) CAC (%) CAY (t ha�1)

100% Grasspea line 452 17.17 d* 0.47 g* 11.25 bc* 0.30 g*100% Grasspea line 38 18.08 cd 0.50 fg 10.82 cd 0.30 g100% Hairy vetch 18.93 c 0.64 fg 11.85 b 0.40 g100% Hungarian vetch 20.03 b 0.81 f 13.52 a 0.55 f100% Triticale 22.50 a 1.80 e 9.82 f 0.79 e75% Grasspea line 452 21.72 a 1.88 de 10.07 def 0.86 de25% Triticale50% Grasspea line 452 22.00 a 2.25 abc 9.95 ef 1.02 ab50% Triticale25% Grasspea line 452 22.33 a 2.24 a�/d 9.88 f 0.99 a�/d75% Triticale75% Grasspea line 38 21.99 a 1.94 cde 9.98 def 0.88 cde25% Triticale50% Grasspea line 38 22.11 a 2.13 a�/e 9.97 ef 0.96 bcd50% Tritilcale25% Grasspea line 38 22.35 a 2.24 a�/d 9.86 f 0.99 a�/d75% Triticale75% Hairy vetch 21.44 a 1.99 b�/e 10.42 def 0.95 bcd25% Triticale50% Hairy vetch 21.60 a 2.13 a�/e 10.33 def 1.00 abc50% Triticale25% Hairy vetch 22.19 a 2.32 ab 10.00 def 1.04 ab75% Triticale75% Hungarian vetch 21.89 a 2.12 a�/e 10.75 cde 1.02 ab25% Triticale50% Hungarian vetch 22.11 a 2.40 a 10.39 def 1.11 a50% Triticale25% Hungarian vetch 21.99 a 2.27 abc 10.56 c�/f 1.05 ab75% Triticale

Mean 21.20 1.77 10.55 0.84CV (%) 2.86 11.53 4.54 9.38LSD 0.93 0.31 0.74 0.12

* Values with the same letters (within a column) do not differ significantly (PB/0.01) according to DUNCAN test.

Y. Karadag and U. Buyukburc

146

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lau

rent

ian

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

1:29

06

Oct

ober

201

4

over the two years, the highest RYT value for dry

matter yield (1.77) was obtained from the 50% hairy

vetch and 50% triticale mixture, while the highest RYT

value for grain yield (2.25) was obtained from the 25%

hairy vetch and 75% triticale mixture (Table 6). The

mixtures outyielded the pure sowings with respect to

dry matter (RYT�/1.58) and grain yield (RYT�/1.76).

Rauber et al. (2000) determined that RYT values for

dry matter and grain yields were 1.15 and 1.09 with

67% pea and 33% oats mixtures under German

conditions. The RYT values for dry matter and seed

yield were calculated at higher than 1 in both of the

years (1.02 and 2.13 for dry matter yield, 1.20 and 2.32

for seed yield, respectively) and in the average of two

years (1.58 and 1.76, respectively). It has been shown

that mixtures make use of environmental resources

better than pure sowings, and competition between

mixture components is not high (Helgadottir &

Snaydon, 1985; Hatipoglu & Tukel, 1997; Rauber et

al., 2000).

In conclusion, triticale is a potentially promising

crop component in the annual legume-cereal mixtures

for forage and hay production during the winter

period under rainfed conditions. Triticale produces

higher yields of forage, as well as protein, than the

traditionally used barley and oat. With regard to

forage yields and the source of high protein concen-

tration, the mixtures including 50% grasspea and vetchare the highest yielding mixtures. Dry matter yield,

especially in the mixtures including lower rates of

triticale, was decreased while the crude protein content

was increased. Fifty percent Hungarian vetch and 50%

triticale mixture is recommended for dry matter yield

for the rainfed condition of northeast Turkey in this

study. The mixtures outyielded the pure sowings with

respect to dry matter (RYT�/1.58) and grain yield(RYT�/1.76). Fifty percent Hungarian vetch and 50%

triticale mixture produced the best crude fiber and

crude ash yields, so it is recommended for this purpose

in this region. In addition, the mixtures of 50%

grasspea line 38 and 50% triticale and 50% hairy vetch

and 50% triticale are recommended to obtain higher

seed and crude protein yields.

References

Al-Masri, M. R. 1998. Yield and nutritive value of vetch (Vicia

sativa ) barley (Hordeum vulgare ) forage under different harvesting

regimes. Tropical Grasslands. 32, 201�/206.

Table 6. Relative yield total (RYT) values for mixture sowings at Tokat in 1998�/1999 and 1999�/2000

Relative yield totals for dry matter yield Relative yield totals for seed yield

Mixture sowings 1999 2000 Mean 1999 2000 Mean

75% Grasspea line 452 0.87 1.99 1.43 0.99 2.39 1.6925% Triticale50% Grasspea line 452 1.18 1.78 1.48 1.15 1.68 1.4250% Triticale25% Grasspea line 452 1.07 1.76 1.42 1.11 2.10 1.6175% Triticale75% Grasspea line 38 1.01 1.79 1.40 0.94 2.22 1.5825% Triticale50% Grasspea line 38 0.80 2.24 1.52 1.21 2.12 1.6750% Triticale25% Grasspea line 38 1.07 1.76 1.42 0.99 2.06 1.5375% Triticale75% Hairy vetch 1.17 2.23 1.70 1.45 2.65 2.0525% Triticale50% Hairy vetch 1.20 2.33 1.77 1.38 2.92 2.1550% Triticale25% Hairy vetch 1.05 2.17 1.61 1.24 3.25 2.2575% Triticale75% Hungarian vetch 0.93 2.43 1.68 1.44 2.54 1.9925% Triticale50% Hungarian vetch 1.09 2.34 1.72 1.35 2.03 1.6950% Triticale25% Hungarian vetch 0.82 2.69 1.76 1.19 1.90 1.5575% Triticale

Mean 1.02 2.13 1.58 1.20 2.32 1.76

Legume�/triticale mixtures in Turkey

147

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lau

rent

ian

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

1:29

06

Oct

ober

201

4

Association of Official Agricultural Chemists. 1984. Official methods

of analysis of the AOAC. 13th Ed. Washington, DC.

Buyukburc, U. 1993. Effect of fertilizers and resting on the

overgrazed semi-arid ranges of Central Anatolia. XVII. Int.

Grassl. Cong. New Zealand-Australia, 62�/64.

Cox, G. W. & Atkins, M. D. 1979. Agricultural Ecology. W.H.

Freman and Company, San Francisco.

Dahnke, W. C. 1980. Recommended chemical soil test procedure for

the North Central Region. ND. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 499

(Revised).

Dovel, R. L. & Bohle, M. 1997. Annual legumes in small grain

production systems. XVIII Int. Grassl. Cong. June 8�/19, Vol: 2,

Session: 19-Forages in Cropping Systems, Canada, 63�/64.

Droushiotis, D. N. 1989. Mixtures of annual legumes and small-

grained cereals for forage production under low rainfall. J. Agric

Sci. 113, 249�/253.

Dyachenko, P. A. 1979. Fodder mixtures for the green conveyer.

Herbage Abstr. 49.3, 112.

Ebelhar, S. A., Frye, W. W. & Blevins, R. L. 1984. Nitrogen from

legume cover crops for no-tillage corn. Agron J. 76, 51�/54.

Gomez, K. A. & Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical procedures for

agricultural research (Ch. 4). In: Gomez, K. A. & Gomez, A. A.

(eds.), An international rice researches institute book, 2nd edn.

John Wiley & Sons, Singapore, pp. 137�/186.

Hacker, J. B. & Minson, D. J. 1981. Digestibility of plant parts.

Herbage Abstr. 51, 459�/482.

Hatipoglu, R. & Tukel, T. 1997. Competition among plants in

agricultural ecosystems. J. Agri Col. Adana. 12 (1), 177�/186.

Helgadottir, A. & Snaydon, R. W. 1985. Competitive interactions

between populations of Poa pratensis and Agrostis tenuis from

ecologically contrasting environments. J. Appl. Ecology. 22, 525�/

537.

Konak, C., Celen, A. E., Turgut, I. & Yilmaz, R. 1997. The

researches on the herbage yield and some other yield character-

istics of common vetch, barley, oats and triticale grown alone and

in mixtures of vetch-cereal. II. Turkey Field Crops Cong. Sept.

22�/25, Samsun, 446�/449.

Marten, G. C. 1985. Nutritional value of the legume in temperate

pastures of the United States. Proc. of a trilateral workshop.

Forage legumes for energy-efficient animal production. USDA-

ARS, USA.

Miskovic, B., Eric, P. & Pantovic, M. 1977. Effect of zinc, copper,

molybdenum and cobalt on development yield and hay quality

of legumes. Proc. XIII. Int. Grassl. Cong. May 18�/27, 1129�/

1134.

Mitchell, W. H. & Teel, M. R. 1977. Winter-annual cover crops for

no-tillage corn production. Agron. J. 69, 569�/573.

Nelson, D. W. & Sommers, L. E. 1980. Total nitrogen analysis in soil

and plant tissues. Journal of the Official Analytical Chemists. 63,

770�/778.

Osman, A. E. & Nersoyan, N. 1985. Annual legumes for integrating

rainfed crop and livestock production. Proceeding XV. Int. Grassl.

Cong. 5, 123�/125.

Qamar, I. A., Keatinge, J. D. H., Mohammed, N., Ali, A. & Khan,

M. A. 1999a. Introduction and management of vetch/barley

forage mixtures in the rainfed areas of Pakistan. 1. Forage yield.

Aust. J. Agric. Res. 50, 1�/9.

Qamar, I. A., Keatinge, J. D. H., Mohammed, N., Ali, A. & Khan,

M. A. 1999b. Introduction and management of vetch/barley

forage mixtures in the rainfed areas of Pakistan. 2. Forage quality.

Aust. J. Agric. Res. 50, 11�/19.

Rauber, R., Schmidtke, K. & Kimpel-Freund, H. 2000. Konkurrenz

und ertragsvorteile in gemengen aus erbsen (Pisum sativum L.)

und hafer (Avena sativa L.). J. Agri. Sci. 185, 33�/47.

Roberts, C. A., Moore, K. I. & Johnson, K. D. 1989. Forage quality

and yield of wheat-vetch at different stages of maturity and vetch

seeding rates. Agron. J. 81, 57�/60.

Robinson, R. G. 1969. Annual legume-grass mixtures for forage and

seed. Agron. J. 61, 759�/761.

Rynolds, M. P., Sayre, K. D. & Vivar, H. E. 1982. Intercropping

wheat and barley with N fixing legume species: a method for

improving ground cover, N-use efficiency and productivity in low

input systems. J. Agric. Sci. 123, 175�/183.

Soya, H., Ergin, I. Z., Tosun, M. & Celen, A. E. 1991. Researches on

the green matter yield and yield characteristics in the mixtures of

some vetch species with barley, oats and triticale. J. Agri. Col.

Izmir. 28, 105�/122.

Y. Karadag and U. Buyukburc

148

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lau

rent

ian

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

1:29

06

Oct

ober

201

4