PRODUCTIVITY OF MEDIC BINAR GRASS MIXTURE IN RELATION TO MINERAL NUTRITION
https://doi.org/10.31677/2072-6724-2019-50-1-133-138
Abstract
The research explores the relation between productivity of binary grass mixture and mineral nutrition. The hypothesis assumes that nutrient value of the same forage depends on mineral nutrition of forage grasses. According to purpose of research, the authors specified the task which is seen to analyze the impact of mineral fertilizers on productivity and nutrition of forage mass of binary grass mixture sown under the cover. The object of the research is a binary grass mixture based on alfalfa (Medicago + sainfoin). Sowing was carried out under the barley and Sinapis cover on two mineral backgrounds: control (without fertilizers) and fertilized. Fertilizers were applied the day before sowing. Crop yield and the quality of harvested mass were assessed in the appropriate period which was the stage of Medicago budding. Two-year industrial and economic experiment highlighted necessity and efficiency of sowing Medicago binar grass mixtures under Sinapis cover with 25% lower sowing rate and apply mineral fertilizers dosed as N23P60K60 in the forest-steppe of Novosibirsk region. This application contributed to the highest output of metabolic energy in dry matter (37 GJ/ha). The authors observed a positive tendency on harvesting from 1 ha of fodder units (2.14 tons), digestible protein (0.35 tons), as well as the yield of dry (3.58 tons) and green mass (13.7 tons). In this variant the authors observed the highest output of metabolic energy in dry matter (37 GJ/ha). There was a positive tendency to harvest fodder units (2.14 tons), digestible protein (0.35 tons) pro 1 ha and get dry (3.58 tons) and green mass (13.7 tons).
About the Authors
V. Iu. Listkov
Siberian University of Consumer Cooperation
Russian Federation
Candidate of Agriculture
Russian Federation
Candidate of Agriculture
A. F. Petrov
Novosibirsk State Agrarian University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Candidate of Agriculture
References
1. Sadohina T.A., Bakshaev D. Yu, Lomova T.G. Kormovaya produktivnost» smeshannyh agrocenozov v lesostepnoj zone Zapadnoj Sibiri, Vestn. NGAU, 2018, No. 1 (46), pp. 52–59. (In Russ.)
2. Ingiri A.I., Laskin P.V., Haitbaev A.H. EHffektivnost» primeneniya bakterial’nyh udobrenij na severnom predele zemledeliya, Izvestiya OGAU, 2011, No. 30–1, pp. 25–28. (In Russ.)
3. Petruk V.A. Urozhajnost» i strukturnye pokazateli travostoya seyanyh mnogoletnih trav i travosmesej v lesostepi zapadnoj Sibiri, Vestn. NGAU, 2014, No. 3 (32), pp. 54–57. (In Russ.)
4. Velikdan» N.T., Zheltopuzov V.N. Dinamika nakopleniya biomassy urozhaya v odnovidovyh i smeshannyh posevah mnogoletnih trav, Sb. nauch. tr. Vseros. NII ovcevodstva i kozovodstva, 2016. Vol. 2, No. 9, pp. 214–220. (In Russ.)
5. 5 Soboleva N.V., Babicheva I.A., Karamaev S.V., Karamaeva A.S. Kachestvo kormov iz lyucerny posevnoj i kozlyatnika vostochnogo, Izv. OGAU, 2016, No. 5 (61), pp. 135–138. (In Russ.)
6. Lazarev N.N., Kostikova T.V. Urozhajnost» i botanicheskij sostav binarnyh i mnogokomponentnyh travosmesej s kleverom polzuchim (Trifolium repens L.) pri intensivnom ispol’zovanii, Izv. TSKHA, 2013, No. 4, pp. 85–94. (In Russ.)
7. Vereshchagina A.S., Voskobulova N.I., Uraskulov R.SH. Vliyanie pokrovnoj kul’tury, sposoba poseva i normy vyseva na zasoryonnost» posevov ehsparceta, Vest. myasn. skotovodstva, 2016, No. 1 (93), pp. 135–138. (In Russ.)
8. Sadohina T.A. Produktivnost» polikomponentnyh bobovo-zlakovyh agrocenozov pri vozdelyvanii na zernofurazh v lesostepnoj zone Zapadnoj Sibiri, Perspektivy resheniya agrarnyh problem v usloviyah Zapadnoj Sibiri v rabotah molodyh uchenyh, Sb. st. FGBNU Alt. NIISKH. Barnaul, 2016. pp. 88– 95. (In Russ.)
9. Kashevarov N.I., Polyudina R.I., O.A. Rozhanskaya, A.V. Zheleznov Selekciya ehsparceta (Onobrychis Mill.) dlya kormoproizvodstva Sibiri, Kormoproizvodstvo, 2013, No. 9, pp. 22–24. (In Russ.)
10. Egorova G.S, Petrunina L.V. Produktivnost» travosmesi lyucerna + ehsparcet na svetlo-kashtanovyh pochvah Volgogradskoj oblasti, Izvestiya Nizhne-volzhskogo agrouniversitetskogo kompleksa: nauka i vysshee professional’noe obrazovanie, 2008, No. 2 (10), pp. 35–41. (In Russ.)
11. Slobodyanik T.M., CHepelev G.P. Slobodyanik N.S. Produktivnost» i pitatel’nost» kozlyatnika vostochnogo v sravnenii s ehsparcetom peschanym, kleverom lugovym i ih smesyami s kostrecom bezostym, Innovacionnye processy i tekhnologii v sovremennom sel’skom hozyajstve (Innovative processes and technologies in modern agriculture), Proceeding of the International Scientific and Practical Conference, 2 ch., 2014.pp. 123–129. (In Russ.)
12. Gasiev V.I., Bekuzarova S.A., Kaloev B.S., Osikina R.V. Produktivnost» ehsparceta v zavisimosti ot norm i sposobov poseva, Izv. Gorsk. gos. agrar. un-ta, 2017, No. 2 (54), pp. 37–43. (In Russ.)
13. PetrovA.F. EHlementy tekhnologii vozdelyvaniya kormovyh bobov v Zapadnoj Sibiri, Kormoproizvodstvo, 2007, No. 10, pp. 8–11. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Listkov V.I., Petrov A.F. PRODUCTIVITY OF MEDIC BINAR GRASS MIXTURE IN RELATION TO MINERAL NUTRITION. Bulletin of NSAU (Novosibirsk State Agrarian University). 2019;(1):133-138. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31677/2072-6724-2019-50-1-133-138
Views:
342
Email this article 
