Effect of Clipping Heights on Rangeland Yield, Productivity, Carrying Capacity and Utilization Check A Case study from the tropical savanna grassland, South Darfur, Sudan

Abu bakr Omer Ismail*1, Yousif Rizgalla Suleiman*1, Aggrey Lemi Abati*1, Salah Khater Gubara1, Erneo B. Ochi 2 and Nafisa Mohammed Abaker Yagoub*3.
*1Department of Animal Production. College of Natural Resource and Environmental Studies, University of Juba, P.O. Box 82/1, Juba, South Sudan.
*2 University of Juba School of Veterinary Medicine P.O. Box 82 Juba South Sudan.
*3 Department of Animal Nutrition, College of Animal Production, University of Bahri, Khartoum North, Sudan
DOI – http://doi.org/10.37502/IJSMR.2022.5211

Abstract

A plot of one fed an (4200 m2 ), in a ranching system of the Southern Darfur savanna grassland – Gazala Gawazat, Animal and Range Research Station, was selected and fenced for artificial grazing experiment for a couple of seasons. The total forage means yield (Kg/ha) at three different clipping heights (5cm, 15cm and 35cm) varied significantly (P < 0.05). The clipping,(harvesting) at a height of 5cm level produced a better harvest yield of forage for maintaining grazing animals at a certain grazing management system when applied. Higher forage yield (1588.68Kg/ha) and carrying capacity (211.82 AU/ha/d) for 5cm clipping height then followed by the 15 cm clipping height in terms of forage yield (641.18 Kg/ha) and carrying capacity (85.84 AU/ha/d).Based on the argument that cattle consume about 2.5 Kgs DM /day/100Kg L.wt. On the other hand, 35 cm clipping height produced a lower yield (488.56Kg/ha) and low carrying capacity (81.41 AU/ha/d), revealing that smaller number of grazing animals can be allowed to graze for shorter period.

On average seasonal basis, season 2019 was much better than grazing season 2018 on 5cm clipping height in terms of forage yield (414.99Kg/ha & 390.17 Kg/ha ) respectively . As such, continual harvest with particular management system, gives more chance offered for grasses to regenerate vigorously to increase the total forage (harvest) yield, with the optimum allocation of grazing animals to utilize the range site. Accordingly, more animal’s units accommodated per unit area of that type of management.

Keywords: Artificial grazing, seasons, clipping heights, forage yield and carrying capacity.

References

  • AOAC (Association of Official Analytical Chemists (2000). Official Methods of Analysis of the AOAC, 17th edn. AOAC, Arlington, Virginia, USA. 1298 p.
  • Ahmed, F.A. and A. E. Ahmed (2008). Plant covers Nutritive Value and Carrying Capacity of a range pasture in low rainfall Woodland Savanna of Western Sudan. E. Afric. Agric. For. J.43 (3) 238-245.
  • Ali, A. D. (1975). Carrying Capacity Assessment under the Annual Range type of the Savanna. Proceeding of the Sudan Veterinary Association conference, Khartoum. Vol.6. 32-36.
  • American Society of Range Management in Join Committee with A.M. Dairy Assoc. A.M. Soc. Prod. & A.M.Sco. Range Management 2004. Pasture and Range Research Technique. Ithaca: Comstock Publ. Res. Counc. Publ.
  • Brendon, R. M. W. Harker and B. Marshal (1999). The Nutritive Value of Grasses Grown in Uganda fed to Zebu Cattle .1. The relation between the percentage crude protein and other nutrients .J. Agric. Sci, (Comb) 61,106- 4.
  • Campbell, A. G. (2001). Grazed Pasture Parameters. III. Relationship of Stocking rate and Grazing Management Experiment with Diary cows. J. Agric. Sci. 67, 217- 21.
  • Chucon, E. A. (1976). The effect of sward characteristics upon grazing behavior. Intake and Animal Production from Tropical Pastures PhD. Thesis, University of Queensland.
  • Crowder, L.V. Chedda, H. R. (1982). Tropical Grassland Husbandry, Longman
  • New York. 84- 106.
  • Dikshit, A.K. and Birthal, P.S. (2010). India’s livestock feed demand: Estimates and projections. Agricultural Economics Research Review 23: 15-23.
  • Djikeng, A., Rao, I.M., Njarui, D., Mutimura, M. Caradus, J. Ghirmire, S.R., Johnson, L. Cardoso, J.A., Ahonsi, M. and Kelemu, S. 2014. Climate-smart Brachiaria grasses for improving livestock production in East Africa. Tropical Grasslands – Forrajes Tropicales. 2: 38−39.
  • Elison, L. (2000). Influence of Grazing on Plant Succession of Rangelands Bot. Rev. 26, 1- 78.
  • Friggens, M.M., War well, M.V., Chambers, J.C. and Kitchen, S.G. 2012. Modeling and predicting vegetation response of Western USA grasslands, shrub lands, and deserts to climate change. In: Climate change in grasslands, shrub lands, and deserts of the Interior American West: A review and needs assessment. United States Department of Agriculture / Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-285.
  • Gonzalez, M. N. (2010). “Optimizing Livestock Production” through range management. Livestock Dev. Dry Intermediate Savanna Zones Con. Prove. Ahmedu Bello Uni. Zaria. Nigeria.
  • Hare, M.D., Tats pong, P. and Phengphet, S. (2009). Herbage yield and quality of Brachiaria cultivars, Paspalum stratum and Panicum maximum in northeast Thailand. Tropical Grasslands. 43: 65–72.
  • Hare, M.D., Phengphet, S., Songbird, T., Sutin, N. and Stern, E. (2013b). Effect of cutting interval on yield and quality of two Panicum maximum cultivars in Thailand. Tropical Grasslands – Forrajes Tropicales. 1: 87−89.
  • Heady, H. F. (1975). Review of Natural Pastures and their Management problems on the North Cost of Tanzania, E. Afri. Agric. For. J. 41- 52-7.
  • Inyang, U.Vendramini, J.M.B.; Sollenberger, L.E., Silveira, M.L.A.; Sellers, B., Adesogan, A. Pavia, L., and Lunpha, A. (2010b). Harvest frequency and stubble height affects herbage accumulation, nutritive value, and persistence of ‘Mulato II’ Brachiaria grass. Forage and grazing lands
  • Jank, L., Barrios, S.C., do Valle, C.B., Simeão, R.M. and Alves, G.F. (2014). The value of improved pastures to Brazilian beef production. Crop and Pasture Science, published first online 2014 Mar. 11 at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/CP13319.
  • KARI (Kenya Agricultural Research Institute) – (2001). The KARI medium term implementation plan. 1st draft report. An agenda of partnership to transform Kenya Agriculture, 2003–2007. 116 p.
  • Macharia, P.N. and Ekaya, W.N. 2005. The impact of rangeland condition and trend to the grazing resources of a semi-arid environment in Kenya. Journal of Human Ecology 17(2): 143-147.
  • A. A. F. DA. Al (2001). Technical Bulletin 33 Energy Allowances and Feeding System for ruminants, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries for Scotland, and Development of Agriculture for North Ireland, H. M. S. London. 66- 67.
  • Njarui, D. M. G., Gichangi, E. M., Gatheru, M., Nyambati, E. M., Ondiko, C. N., Njunie, M. N., Ndungu-Magiroi, K. W., Kaiya, W. W., Kute, C. A. O. and Ayako, W. (2016). A comparative analysis of livestock farming in smallholder mixed crop-livestock systems in Kenya: 2. Feed utilization, availability and mitigation strategies to feed scarcity. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 28, Article #067.
  • SAS institute 2002. Statistical Analysis Soft Ware (SAS) users guide version 9.2 SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC, USA.