|
Registro Completo |
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Pantanal. |
|
Data corrente: |
07/06/1995 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
07/06/1995 |
|
Autoria: |
ANDERSON, K. L.; SMITH, E. F.; OWENSBY, C. E. |
|
Título: |
Burning bluestem range. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
1970 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Journal of Range Management, v.23, n.2, p.81-92, Mar. 1970. |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Time of spring burning on bluestem range under uniform, moderate grazing was studied from the standpoint of effects on soil moisture, yield of herbage range condition in terms of botanical composition, and cattle gains. Early burning, which leaves the soil surface unprotected from loss by runnoff, evaporation, and surface erosion for a long period before new growth begins, lowered soil moisture. The rate of water intake is reduced by burning bluestem range and the reduction continues throughout the season (Hanks and Anderson, 1957). Aldous (1934) showed that early-spring burning permitted a quicker warming of the soil, hence growth was faster early in the season with consequent heavier use of soil moisture. All those sources of moisture loss, observed earlier in ungrazed plot trials on OU, were found to result only under early-spring burning in OU and Cp soils. Herbage yields on grazed OU, LB, and Cp were adversely affected by early burning. That resulted in relatively heavier grazing as stocking rates were maintained. Thus depletion resulted both from moisture losses that occurred and from overutilization. Late-spring burning, on the other hand, did not reduce forage yields and retrogression did not occur in any of the range sites sampled. Mid-spring burning caused intermediate forage yields with no retroregression. Disappearance of herbage, which may be taken as an index of the amount used in grazing, was not different from one treatment to another, indicating approximately equal use, even where yields varied. Disappearance was greater, however, from OU than from the steeper, rockier LB, most likely becausae OU provided easier travel. Botanical composition, the major criterion in judging range condition, showed definitive response in bluestem range to time of burning. Early-spring burning resulted in a typical depletion response (retrogression-decline of the climax dominants, the decreasers; increase of certain Iesser species, the increasers; and invasion by weedy species). Late-spring burning, on the other hand, favored the most desirable species, the decreasers, (especially big bluestem) and discouraged both the less valuable increasers and weeds. Lat-spring burning resulted in improved range condition. Since there was no significant reduction of herbage production by late-spring burning, it seems compatible with the growth pattern of the species preterred for livestock grazing. Mid- and late-spring burning produced more weight gain on steers than nonburning. Late-spring burning also increased steer gains over early-spring burning. The weight gain obtained with early-spring burning was essentially equal to that obtained with nonburning. The effects of late-spring burning of moderately stocked bluestem range on soil moisture, herbage yield, range condition, and animal performance indicate burning to be desirable at that time. MenosTime of spring burning on bluestem range under uniform, moderate grazing was studied from the standpoint of effects on soil moisture, yield of herbage range condition in terms of botanical composition, and cattle gains. Early burning, which leaves the soil surface unprotected from loss by runnoff, evaporation, and surface erosion for a long period before new growth begins, lowered soil moisture. The rate of water intake is reduced by burning bluestem range and the reduction continues throughout the season (Hanks and Anderson, 1957). Aldous (1934) showed that early-spring burning permitted a quicker warming of the soil, hence growth was faster early in the season with consequent heavier use of soil moisture. All those sources of moisture loss, observed earlier in ungrazed plot trials on OU, were found to result only under early-spring burning in OU and Cp soils. Herbage yields on grazed OU, LB, and Cp were adversely affected by early burning. That resulted in relatively heavier grazing as stocking rates were maintained. Thus depletion resulted both from moisture losses that occurred and from overutilization. Late-spring burning, on the other hand, did not reduce forage yields and retrogression did not occur in any of the range sites sampled. Mid-spring burning caused intermediate forage yields with no retroregression. Disappearance of herbage, which may be taken as an index of the amount used in grazing, was not different from one treatment to another, indicating approximatel... Mostrar Tudo |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Bluestem range; Management; Pasture. |
|
Thesagro: |
Manejo; Pastagem; Queimada. |
|
Thesaurus Nal: |
burning. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
-- |
|
Marc: |
LEADER 03429naa a2200229 a 4500
001 1784342
005 1995-06-07
008 1970 bl --- 0-- u #d
100 1 $aANDERSON, K. L.
245 $aBurning bluestem range.
260 $c1970
520 $aTime of spring burning on bluestem range under uniform, moderate grazing was studied from the standpoint of effects on soil moisture, yield of herbage range condition in terms of botanical composition, and cattle gains. Early burning, which leaves the soil surface unprotected from loss by runnoff, evaporation, and surface erosion for a long period before new growth begins, lowered soil moisture. The rate of water intake is reduced by burning bluestem range and the reduction continues throughout the season (Hanks and Anderson, 1957). Aldous (1934) showed that early-spring burning permitted a quicker warming of the soil, hence growth was faster early in the season with consequent heavier use of soil moisture. All those sources of moisture loss, observed earlier in ungrazed plot trials on OU, were found to result only under early-spring burning in OU and Cp soils. Herbage yields on grazed OU, LB, and Cp were adversely affected by early burning. That resulted in relatively heavier grazing as stocking rates were maintained. Thus depletion resulted both from moisture losses that occurred and from overutilization. Late-spring burning, on the other hand, did not reduce forage yields and retrogression did not occur in any of the range sites sampled. Mid-spring burning caused intermediate forage yields with no retroregression. Disappearance of herbage, which may be taken as an index of the amount used in grazing, was not different from one treatment to another, indicating approximately equal use, even where yields varied. Disappearance was greater, however, from OU than from the steeper, rockier LB, most likely becausae OU provided easier travel. Botanical composition, the major criterion in judging range condition, showed definitive response in bluestem range to time of burning. Early-spring burning resulted in a typical depletion response (retrogression-decline of the climax dominants, the decreasers; increase of certain Iesser species, the increasers; and invasion by weedy species). Late-spring burning, on the other hand, favored the most desirable species, the decreasers, (especially big bluestem) and discouraged both the less valuable increasers and weeds. Lat-spring burning resulted in improved range condition. Since there was no significant reduction of herbage production by late-spring burning, it seems compatible with the growth pattern of the species preterred for livestock grazing. Mid- and late-spring burning produced more weight gain on steers than nonburning. Late-spring burning also increased steer gains over early-spring burning. The weight gain obtained with early-spring burning was essentially equal to that obtained with nonburning. The effects of late-spring burning of moderately stocked bluestem range on soil moisture, herbage yield, range condition, and animal performance indicate burning to be desirable at that time.
650 $aburning
650 $aManejo
650 $aPastagem
650 $aQueimada
653 $aBluestem range
653 $aManagement
653 $aPasture
700 1 $aSMITH, E. F.
700 1 $aOWENSBY, C. E.
773 $tJournal of Range Management$gv.23, n.2, p.81-92, Mar. 1970.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Pantanal (CPAP) |
|
