Paper · 2008 · NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences

Can herbage nitrogen fractionation inLolium perennebe improved by herbage management?

N.J. Hoekstra; P.C. Struik; E.A. Lantinga; et al.

9
claims
20
verbatim quotes
15
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The high degradability of grass protein is an important factor in the low nitrogen (N) utilization of grazing bovines in intensive European grassland systems. We tested the hypothesis that protein degradability as measured by the Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein System (CNCPS) protein fractionation scheme, can be manipulated by herbage management tools, with the aim to reduce N loss to the environment. A field experiment comprising the factorial combinations of three fertilizer N application rates (0, 90 and 390 kg N ha−1 year−1), three regrowth periods (2–3, 4–5, and 6–7 weeks), two perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars [Aberdart (high sugar content) and Respect (low sugar content)] and two cutting heights (approximately 8 and 12 cm) was conducted at Teagasc, Johnstown Castle Research Centre, Wexford, Ireland. The plots were sampled during four seasons [September/October 2002 (late season), April 2003 (early season), May/June 2003 (mid season) and September 2003 (late season)] and protein fractions were determined in both sheath and lamina material. The protein was highly soluble and on average 19% and 28% of total N was in the form of non-protein N, 16% and 19% in the form of buffer-soluble protein, 52% and 40% in the form of buffer-insoluble protein, and 12% and 13% in the form of potentially available cell wall N for lamina and sheath material, respectively. In both materials only 0.9% of total N was present as unavailable cell wall N. In general the herbage management tools investigated did not have much effect on protein fractionation. The effects of regrowth period, cultivar and cutting height were small and inconsistent. High N application rates significantly increased protein degradability, especially during late season. This is relevant, as it has been shown that enhanced protein degradation increases the potential N loss through urine excretion at a time when urine-N excreted onto pasture is prone to leaching. However, the effect was most evident for sheath material, which forms only a small proportion of the animals' intake. It was concluded that there appears to be little scope for manipulating the herbage-N fractionation through herbage management. The consequences for modelling herbage quality could be positive as there does not seem to be a need to model the individual N fractions; in most cases the N fractions can be expressed as a fixed proportion of total N instead.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Herbage management tools had little effect on protein fractionation of perennial ryegrass.

Taxon
Lolium perenneLolium perennee0
Treatment
herbage management toolse1
Outcome
protein fractionatione1
Direction
no_changeinferrede1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–643 · show in text ↑
e1

“In general the herbage management tools investigated did not have much effect on protein fractionation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1479–1581 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Regrowth period, cultivar and cutting height had small and inconsistent effects on protein fractionation.

Taxon
Lolium perenneLolium perennee0
Treatment
regrowth period, cultivar and cutting heighte2
Outcome
protein fractionatione1
Direction
no_changeinferrede2
Qualifier
small and inconsistente2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–643 · show in text ↑
e1

“In general the herbage management tools investigated did not have much effect on protein fractionation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1479–1581 · show in text ↑
e2

“The effects of regrowth period, cultivar and cutting height were small and inconsistent”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1583–1670 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

High N application rates significantly increased protein degradability, especially in late season.

Taxon
Lolium perenneLolium perennee0
Treatment
High N application ratese3
Outcome
protein degradabilitye3
Direction
increasede3
Setting
late seasone3

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–643 · show in text ↑
e3

“High N application rates significantly increased protein degradability, especially during late season”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1672–1773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The N effect on protein degradability was most evident in sheath material.

Taxon
Lolium perenneLolium perennee0
Organ / stage
sheath materiale4
Treatment
High N application ratese3
Outcome
protein degradabilitye3
Direction
higherinferrede4

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–643 · show in text ↑
e3

“High N application rates significantly increased protein degradability, especially during late season”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1672–1773 · show in text ↑
e4

“However, the effect was most evident for sheath material, which forms only a small proportion of the animals' intake”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1970–2086 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Non-protein N was on average 19% and 28% of total N in lamina and sheath material.

Taxon
Lolium perenneLolium perennee0
Organ / stage
lamina and sheath materiale5
Outcome
non-protein Ne5
Value
19% and 28%e5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–643 · show in text ↑
e5

“The protein was highly soluble and on average 19% and 28% of total N was in the form of non-protein N, 16% and 19% in the form of buffer-soluble protein, 52% and 40% in the form of buffer-insoluble protein, and 12% and 13% in the form of potentially available cell wall N for lamina and sheath material, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1082–1398 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Buffer-soluble protein was 16% and 19% of total N in lamina and sheath material.

Taxon
Lolium perenneLolium perennee0
Organ / stage
lamina and sheath materiale5
Outcome
buffer-soluble proteine5
Value
16% and 19%e5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–643 · show in text ↑
e5

“The protein was highly soluble and on average 19% and 28% of total N was in the form of non-protein N, 16% and 19% in the form of buffer-soluble protein, 52% and 40% in the form of buffer-insoluble protein, and 12% and 13% in the form of potentially available cell wall N for lamina and sheath material, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1082–1398 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Buffer-insoluble protein was 52% and 40% of total N in lamina and sheath material.

Taxon
Lolium perenneLolium perennee0
Organ / stage
lamina and sheath materiale5
Outcome
buffer-insoluble proteine5
Value
52% and 40%e5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–643 · show in text ↑
e5

“The protein was highly soluble and on average 19% and 28% of total N was in the form of non-protein N, 16% and 19% in the form of buffer-soluble protein, 52% and 40% in the form of buffer-insoluble protein, and 12% and 13% in the form of potentially available cell wall N for lamina and sheath material, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1082–1398 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Potentially available cell wall N was 12% and 13% of total N in lamina and sheath material.

Taxon
Lolium perenneLolium perennee0
Organ / stage
lamina and sheath materiale5
Outcome
potentially available cell wall Ne5
Value
12% and 13%e5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–643 · show in text ↑
e5

“The protein was highly soluble and on average 19% and 28% of total N was in the form of non-protein N, 16% and 19% in the form of buffer-soluble protein, 52% and 40% in the form of buffer-insoluble protein, and 12% and 13% in the form of potentially available cell wall N for lamina and sheath material, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1082–1398 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Unavailable cell wall N was 0.9% of total N in both materials.

Taxon
Lolium perenneLolium perennee0
Organ / stage
both materialse6
Outcome
unavailable cell wall Ne6
Value
0.9%e6

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lolium perenne
Lolium perenne · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–643 · show in text ↑
e6

“In both materials only 0.9% of total N was present as unavailable cell wall N”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1400–1477 · show in text ↑

pruning · quality: protein · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
See all 3 papers →

nitrogen · quality: protein · Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)Results agree

3 papers: 0 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
See all 3 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.