BEHİÇ COŞKUN, GÜRHAN KELEŞ, FATMA İNAL, M. Selçuk ALATAŞ, CAHİT ÖZCAN, Serkan ATEŞ

Gebeleme ve hamur olum döneminde hasat edilen buğdaygil hasıllarının protein fraksiyonları ve ham protein üretimleri

Bu çalışmada gebeleme ve hamur olum döneminde hasat edilen arpa, buğday, çavdar, tritikale ve yulaf hasıllarının birim alana ürettikleri ham protein ve sindirilebilir ham protein verimleri (kg/da) ile Cornell Net Karbonhidrat ve Protein Sistemine göre protein fraksiyonları belirlenmiştir. Hamur olum döneminde hasılların ham protein içeriği gebeleme dönemine kıyasla ortalama olarak %42 daha düşükken (P

Protein fractions and crude protein yield of cereal forages harvested at booting and dough stage of maturity

In this study, crude protein and digestible crude protein production (kg/da) of barley, wheat, rye, triticale and oat were measured at booting and dough stages of maturity and their protein fractions were determined according to Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein System. The average crude protein contents of cereal forages were 42% lower (P<0.05) at dough stage than booting stage while crude protein production decreased (P<0.05) by only 10% from dough stage to booting stage of maturity. However, digestible crude protein production was similar (P>0.05) in both periods. The crude protein quality of wheat and oat was higher than other cereal forages at the booting stage. These results suggest that time of harvest can be arranged according to cereal forages with desired protein properties that change with maturity stage.

PDF

___

1. Khorasani GR, Jedel PE, Helm JH, Kennelly JJ: Influence of stage of maturity on yield components and chemical composition of cereal grain silages. Can J Anim Sci, 77, 259-267, 1997.
2. Coşkun B, Keleş G, İnal F, Ateş S, Alataş MS: Başaklanma öncesi ve hamur olum döneminde kimyasal ya da biyolojik katkı maddesi ile silolanmış tahıl hasıllarının fermantasyon özellikleri ve besin madde içerikleri, Selçuk Üniversitesi BAP 11401094 nolu proje sonuç raporu, 2013.
3. Keleş G, Coşkun B, Işık Ş: Tahıl hasıllarının farklı gelişme dönemlerindeki agronomik özellikleri, besleme değerleri ve kuzu performansı üzerine etkileri. TÜBİTAK 111O009 nolu proje sonuç raporu, 2012.
4. Helsel ZR, Thomas JW: Small grains for forage. J Dairy Sci, 70, 2330- 2338, 1987.
5. NRC: National Research Council, Nutrients requirements of dairy cattle, The national academic press, Washington DC, 2001.
6. AOAC: Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 17th ed., 2nd Rev., Gaithersburg, MD, USA, Association of Analytical Communities, 2003.
7. Krishinamoorthy U, Muscato TV, Sniffen CJ, Van Soest PJ: Nitrogen fractions in selected feedstuffs. J Dairy Sci, 65, 217-225, 1982.
8. Sniffen CJ, O’Connor JD, Van Soest PJ, Fox DG, Russell JB: A net carbohydrate and protein system for evaluating cattle diets: II. Carbohydrate and protein availability. J Anim Sci, 70, 3562-3577, 1992.
9. Düzgüneş O, Kesici T, Kavuncu O, Gürbüz F: Araştırma ve Deneme Metotları (İstatistik Metotları II). Ankara Üniv. Zir. Fak.Yay.: 1021, Ankara, 1987.
10. SPSS: SPSS for Windows, Version 17. SPSS Inc. Chicago, 2010.
11. McCartney DH, Vaage AS: Comparative yield and feeding value of barley, oat and triticale silages. Can J Anim Sci, 74, 91-96, 1994.