Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T06:30:02.543Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of mycorrhizal inoculum under low fertilizer application: effects on forage yield, milk production, and energetic and economic efficiency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 February 2018

P. Uzun ,
F. Masucci Open the ORCID record for F. Masucci [Opens in a new window] ,
F. Serrapica ,
M. L. Varricchio ,
C. Pacelli ,
S. Claps  and
A. Di Francia
P. Uzun
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, via Università 100, 80055 Portici – NA, Italy
F. Masucci*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, via Università 100, 80055 Portici – NA, Italy
F. Serrapica
Affiliation:
Scuola di Scienze Agrarie, Forestali, Alimentari ed Ambientali, Università degli Studi della Basilicata, via dell'Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, Italy
M. L. Varricchio
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, via Università 100, 80055 Portici – NA, Italy
C. Pacelli
Affiliation:
Scuola di Scienze Agrarie, Forestali, Alimentari ed Ambientali, Università degli Studi della Basilicata, via dell'Ateneo Lucano 10, 85100 Potenza, Italy
S. Claps
Affiliation:
Centro di ricerca Zootecnia e Acquacoltura (CREA-ZA), Consiglio per la Ricerca in Agricoltura e l'Analisi dell'Economia Agraria, S.S. 7 Via Appia, 85051 Bella Muro – PZ, Italy
A. Di Francia
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, via Università 100, 80055 Portici – NA, Italy
*
Author for correspondence: F. Masucci, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two studies were carried out to assess the effects of seed inoculation by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) coupled to a reduced fertilizer supply on yield, economic benefit and energy balance of maize and sorghum forage cropping. The effect of dietary inclusion of mycorrhizal forages on milk yield was also examined. The control treatments (control maize and control sorghum) were non-mycorrhizal seeds fertilized with recommended doses of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P). The inoculated treatments (inoculated maize and inoculated sorghum) were the mycorrhizal seeds fertilized with a half dose of N. For each treatment, two plots, 1.5 ha each, were used. The forages were ensiled and fed to lactating buffaloes (maize) and dairy cows (sorghum). Plant traits and yield parameters were generally found to be higher in inoculated compared to the control plants. Inoculation positively influenced the chemical composition of sorghum silage that resulted in less fibre and more protein and presented higher dry matter degradability. No differences between the control and inoculated maize silages were found. For both inoculated crops, higher profitability (+670 and 732€ for maize and sorghum, respectively), as well as an increment of net energy (+0.24 and 0.60, respectively), and energy use efficiency (+0.53 and 0.85, respectively) were observed. The use of the inoculated silages did not affect milk yield. Results suggest that seed inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi combined with the low rate of fertilizers could be a viable solution to increase the eco-efficiency and profitability in forage production without affecting forage quality and lactating cow productivity.

Keywords

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungienergy efficiencyforage yield and qualitymilk production and qualityprofitability
Type
Animal Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 156 , Issue 1 , January 2018 , pp. 127 - 135
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alluvione, F, Moretti, B, Sacco, D and Grignani, C (2011) EUE (energy use efficiency) of cropping systems for a sustainable agriculture. Energy 36, 4468–4481.Google Scholar
Andrieu, J, Demarquilly, C and Sauvant, D (1988) Tables de la valeur nutritive des aliments. In Jarrige, R (ed.). Alimentations des Bovins, Ovins et Caprins. Paris, France: INRA Editions, pp. 351–464.Google Scholar
Angelini, LG, Ceccarini, L and Bonari, E (2005) Biomass yield and energy balance of giant reed (Arundo donax L.) cropped in central Italy as related to different management practices. European Journal of Agronomy 22, 375–389.Google Scholar
Angelini, LG, Ceccarini, L, Nassi o Di Nasso, N and Bonari, E (2009) Comparison of Arundo donax L. and Miscanthus × giganteus in a long-term field experiment in Central Italy: analysis of productive characteristics and energy balance. Biomass and Bioenergy 33, 635–643.Google Scholar
AOAC (1990) Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of the Official Analysis Chemists. Arlington, VA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.Google Scholar
Bechini, L and Castoldi, N (2009) On-farm monitoring of economic and environmental performances of cropping systems: results of a 2-year study at the field scale in northern Italy. Ecological Indicators 9, 1096–1113.Google Scholar
Boehmel, C, Lewandowski, I and Claupein, W (2008) Comparing annual and perennial energy cropping systems with different management intensities. Agricultural Systems 96, 224–236.Google Scholar
Bolan, NS (1991) A critical review on the role of mycorrhizal fungi in the uptake of phosphorus by plants. Plant and Soil 134, 189–207.Google Scholar
Buckley, C and Carney, P (2013) The potential to reduce the risk of diffuse pollution from agriculture while improving economic performance at farm level. Environmental Science & Policy 25, 118–126.Google Scholar
Canbolat, MY, Bilen, S, Çakmakçı, R, Şahin, F and Aydın, A (2006) Effect of plant growth-promoting bacteria and soil compaction on barley seedling growth, nutrient uptake, soil properties and rhizosphere microflora. Biology and Fertility of Soils 42, 350–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cazzato, E, Laudadio, V and Tufarelli, V (2012) Effects of harvest period, nitrogen fertilization and mycorrhizal fungus inoculation on triticale (×Triticosecale Wittmack) forage yield and quality. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 27, 278–286.Google Scholar
Clements, DR, Weise, SF, Brown, R, Stonehouse, DP, Hume, DJ and Swanton, CJ (1995) Energy analysis of tillage and herbicide inputs in alternative weed management systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 52, 119–128.Google Scholar
Conforti, P and Giampietro, M (1997) Fossil energy use in agriculture: an international comparison. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 65, 231–243.Google Scholar
Daei, G, Ardekani, MR, Rejali, F, Teimuri, S and Miransari, M (2009) Alleviation of salinity stress on wheat yield, yield components, and nutrient uptake using arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi under field conditions. Journal of Plant Physiology 166, 617–625.Google Scholar
Deike, S, Pallutt, B and Christen, O (2008) Investigations on the energy efficiency of organic and integrated farming with specific emphasis on pesticide use intensity. European Journal of Agronomy 28, 461–470.Google Scholar
Finlay, RD (2008) Ecological aspects of mycorrhizal symbiosis: with special emphasis on the functional diversity of interactions involving the extraradical mycelium. Journal of Experimental Botany 59, 1115–1126.Google Scholar
Gianinazzi, S, Gollotte, A, Binet, MN, van Tuinen, D, Redecker, D and Wipf, D (2010) Agroecology: the key role of arbuscular mycorrhizas in ecosystem services. Mycorrhiza 20, 519–530.Google Scholar
Giovannetti, M and Mosse, B (1980) An evaluation of techniques for measuring vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal infection in roots. New Phytologist 84, 489–500.Google Scholar
Gourley, CJP, Aarons, SR and Powell, JM (2012) Nitrogen use efficiency and manure management practices in contrasting dairy production systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 147, 73–81.Google Scholar
Govindarajulu, M, Pfeffer, PE, Jin, H, Abubaker, J, Douds, DD, Allen, JW, Bücking, H, Lammers, PJ and Shachar-Hill, Y (2005) Nitrogen transfer in the arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. Nature 435, 819–823.Google Scholar
Hawkins, HJ and George, E (1999) Effect of plant nitrogen status on the contribution of arbuscular mycorrhizal hyphae to plant nitrogen uptake. Physiologia Plantarum 105, 694–700.Google Scholar
Hawkins, HJ, Johansen, A and George, E (2000) Uptake and transport of organic and inorganic nitrogen by arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Plant and Soil 226, 275–285.Google Scholar
He, X, Xu, M, Qiu, GY and Zhou, J (2009) Use of 15N stable isotope to quantify nitrogen transfer between mycorrhizal plants. Journal of Plant Ecology 2, 107–118.Google Scholar
Helander, CA and Delin, K (2004) Evaluation of farming systems according to valuation indices developed within a European network on integrated and ecological arable farming systems. European Journal of Agronomy 21, 53–67.Google Scholar
Hülsbergen, KJ, Feil, B, Biermann, S, Rathke, GW, Kalk, WD and Diepenbrock, W (2001) A method of energy balancing in crop production and its application in a long-term fertilizer trial. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 86, 303–321.Google Scholar
Hülsbergen, KJ, Feil, B and Diepenbrock, W (2002) Rates of nitrogen application required to achieve maximum energy efficiency for various crops: results of a long-term experiment. Field Crops Research 77, 61–76.Google Scholar
Italian Republic, Ministerial Decree September 23 (2011) Approvazione dei Metodi Ufficiali di Analisi per i Fertilizzanti – Supplemento 10 (Official methods of analysis for fertilizers – Supplement 10). Italian Official Gazette n. 230, October 30 2011. Available at http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2011/10/03/11A12840/sg (Accessed 12 January 2018).Google Scholar
Jakobsen, I, Gazey, C and Abbott, LK (2001) Phosphate transport by communities of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in intact soil cores. New Phytologist 149, 95–103.Google Scholar
Jin, H, Pfeffer, PE, Douds, DD, Piotrowski, E, Lammers, PJ and Shachar-Hill, Y (2005) The uptake, metabolism, transport and transfer of nitrogen in an arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. New Phytologist 168, 687–696.Google Scholar
Jones, MR (1989) Analysis of the use of energy in agriculture – approaches and problems. Agricultural Systems 29, 339–355.Google Scholar
Köppen, W (1936) Das geographische system der climate. In Köppen, W and Geiger, R (eds). Handbuch der Klimatologie, Vol I, Part C . Berlin, Germany: Gebrüder Borntraeger, pp. 1–44.Google Scholar
Kuesters, J and Lammel, J (1999) Investigations of the energy efficiency of the production of winter wheat and sugar beet in Europe. European Journal of Agronomy 11, 35–43.Google Scholar
Lancashire, PD, Bleiholder, H, van den Boom, T, Langelüddeke, P, Stauss, R, Weber, E and Witzenberger, A (1991) A uniform decimal code for growth stages of crops and weeds. Annals of Applied Biology 119, 561–601.Google Scholar
Lekberg, Y and Koide, RT (2005) Is plant performance limited by abundance of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi? A meta-analysis of studies published between 1988 and 2003. New Phytologist 168, 189–204.Google Scholar
Lestingi, A, De Giorgio, D, Montemurro, F, Convertini, G and Laudadio, V (2007) Effects of bio-activators on yield and quality composition of triticale forage as an animal food resource. Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment 5, 164–171.Google Scholar
Licitra, G, Hernandez, TM and Van Soest, PJ (1996) Standardization of procedures for nitrogen fractionation of ruminant feeds. Animal Feed Science and Technology 57, 347–358.Google Scholar
Liu, A, Hamel, C, Hamilton, RI, Ma, BL and Smith, DL (2000) Acquisition of Cu, Zn, Mn and Fe by mycorrhizal maize (Zea mays L.) grown in soil at different P and micronutrient levels. Mycorrhiza 9, 331–336.Google Scholar
Martínez-López, JR, Vázquez-Alvarado, RE, Gutiérrez-Ornelas, E, del Río, MAP, López-Cervantes, R, Olivares-Sáenz, E, Vidales-Contreras, JA and Valdez-Cepeda, RD (2009) Mycorrhiza effect on nutritional quality and biomass production of Agave (Agave americana L.) and cactus pear (Opuntia lindheimeri Engelm). Journal of the Professional Association for Cactus Development 11, 69–77.Google Scholar
Mazzinelli, G, Valoti, P, Redaelli, R, Alfieri, M, Mascheroni, S and Facchinetti, F (2015) Gli ibridi di mais per il trinciato integrale. Informatore Agrario 71, 36–42.Google Scholar
Merrill, AL and Watt, BK (1973) Energy Value of Foods: Basis and Derivation. Agriculture Handbook no. 74. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Meul, M, Nevens, F, Reheul, D and Hofman, G (2007) Energy use efficiency of specialised dairy, arable and pig farms in Flanders. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 119, 135–144.Google Scholar
Mihov, M and Tringovska, I (2010) Energy efficiency improvement of greenhouse tomato production by applying new biofertilizers. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science 16, 454–458.Google Scholar
Miransari, M, Bahrami, HA, Rejali, F, Malakouti, MJ and Torabi, H (2007) Using arbuscular mycorrhiza to reduce the stressful effects of soil compaction on corn (Zea mays L.) growth. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 39, 2014–2026.Google Scholar
Mishra, S, Sharma, S and Vasudevan, P (2008) Comparative effect of biofertilizers on fodder production and quality in Guinea grass (Panicum maximum Jacq.). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 88, 1667–1673.Google Scholar
Mori, M and Di Mola, I (2012) Guida Alla Concimazione. Metodi, Procedure e Strumenti per un Servizio di Consulenza. Dragoni, Italy: Imago Editrice s.r.l.Google Scholar
Nassi o Di Nasso, N, Bosco, S, Di Bene, C, Coli, A, Mazzoncini, M and Bonari, E (2011) Energy efficiency in long-term Mediterranean cropping systems with different management intensities. Energy 36, 1924–1930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, JM, Gourley, CJP, Rotz, CA and Weaver, DM (2010) Nitrogen use efficiency: a potential performance indicator and policy tool for dairy farms. Environmental Science & Policy 13, 217–228.Google Scholar
Rathke, GW, Wienhold, BJ, Wilhelm, WW and Diepenbrock, W (2007) Tillage and rotation effect on corn–soybean energy balances in eastern Nebraska. Soil and Tillage Research 97, 60–70.Google Scholar
Rotz, CA, Satter, LD, Mertens, DR and Muck, RE (1999) Feeding strategy, nitrogen cycling, and profitability of dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 2841–2855.Google Scholar
Ryan, MH and Graham, JH (2002) Is there a role for arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in production agriculture? Plant and Soil 244, 263–271.Google Scholar
Ryan, W, Hennessy, D, Murphy, JJ and Boland, TM (2010) The effects of autumn closing date on sward leaf area index and herbage mass during the winter period. Grass and Forage Science 65, 200–211.Google Scholar
Sabia, E, Claps, S, Napolitano, F, Annicchiarico, G, Bruno, A, Francaviglia, R, Sepe, L and Aleandri, R (2015 a) In vivo digestibility of two different forage species inoculated with arbuscular mycorrhiza in Mediterranean red goats. Small Ruminant Research 123, 83–87.Google Scholar
Sabia, E, Claps, S, Morone, G, Bruno, A, Sepe, L and Aleandri, R (2015 b) Field inoculation of arbuscular mycorrhiza on maize (Zea mays L.) under low inputs: preliminary study on quantitative and qualitative aspects. Italian Journal of Agronomy 10, 30–33.Google Scholar
Sartori, L, Basso, B, Bertocco, M and Oliviero, G (2005) Energy use and economic evaluation of a three year crop rotation for conservation and organic farming in NE Italy. Biosystems Engineering 91, 245–256.Google Scholar
Selosse, MA, Baudoin, E and Vandenkoornhuyse, P (2004) Symbiotic microorganisms, a key for ecological success and protection of plants. Comptes Rendus Biologies 327, 639–648.Google Scholar
Soha, MED (2014) The partial budget analysis for sorghum farm in Sinai Peninsula, Egypt. Annals of Agricultural Sciences 59, 77–81.Google Scholar
Tellarini, V and Caporali, F (2000) An input/output methodology to evaluate farms as sustainable agroecosystems: an application of indicators to farms in central Italy. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 77, 111–123.Google Scholar
Thirkell, TJ, Cameron, DD and Hodge, A (2016) Resolving the ‘nitrogen paradox’ of arbuscular mycorrhizas: fertilization with organic matter brings considerable benefits for plant nutrition and growth. Plant, Cell & Environment 39, 1683–1690.Google Scholar
Toussaint, JP, St-Arnaud, M and Charest, C (2004) Nitrogen transfer and assimilation between the arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus intraradices Schenck & Smith and Ri T-DNA roots of Daucus carota L. in an in vitro compartmented system. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 50, 251–260.Google Scholar
Valadares Filho, SC, Broderick, GA, Valadares, RFD and Clayton, MK (2000) Effect of replacing alfalfa silage with high moisture corn on nutrient utilization and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 106–114.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ (1994) Nutritional Ecology of the Ruminant, 2nd edn. Ithaca, NY: Comstock Publishing Associates.Google Scholar
Van Soest, PJ, Robertson, JB and Lewis, BA (1991) Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74, 3583–3597.Google Scholar
Vessey, JK (2003) Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant and Soil 255, 571–586.Google Scholar
Wilman, D and Adesogan, A (2000) A comparison of filter bag methods with conventional tube methods of determining the in vitro digestibility of forages. Animal Feed Science and Technology 84, 33–47.Google Scholar