|
Registro Completo |
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos. |
|
Data corrente: |
01/08/1992 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
17/06/2025 |
|
Autoria: |
MANNETJE, L. T.; HAYDOCK, K. P. |
|
Título: |
The dry-weight-rank method for the botanical analysis of pasture. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
1963 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Grass and Forage Science, v. 18, n. 4, p. 268-275, 1963. |
|
DOI: |
10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00362.x |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Abstract: A method is presented which gives an accurate estimate of the botanical composition of grassland on a dry‐weight basis, without the necessity of cutting and hand‐separating samples. In a number of quadrats an observer estimates which species take first, second, and third place in terms of dry‐weight. The data are tabulated to give the proportion of quadrats in which each species received first, second, and third place. These proportions are multiplied by 70·2, 21·1, and 8·7, respectively, and added to give the dry‐weight percentages of each species. The dry‐weight‐rank method was tested four times by comparing the results with those of hand‐separating cut samples. No great differences between the two methods were detected when exact rankings, obtained from hand‐separating, were used, and it was found that ranks could be estimated accurately, provided that sufficient training had been given to the observers. |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Composicao; Feed evaluation; Leaf dry mass. |
|
Thesagro: |
Análise; Botânica; Pastagem. |
|
Thesaurus Nal: |
Botanical composition; Forage evaluation; Pastures. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
F Plantas e Produtos de Origem Vegetal |
|
Marc: |
LEADER 01668naa a2200253 a 4500
001 1522259
005 2025-06-17
008 1963 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $a10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00362.x$2DOI
100 1 $aMANNETJE, L. T.
245 $aThe dry-weight-rank method for the botanical analysis of pasture.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c1963
520 $aAbstract: A method is presented which gives an accurate estimate of the botanical composition of grassland on a dry‐weight basis, without the necessity of cutting and hand‐separating samples. In a number of quadrats an observer estimates which species take first, second, and third place in terms of dry‐weight. The data are tabulated to give the proportion of quadrats in which each species received first, second, and third place. These proportions are multiplied by 70·2, 21·1, and 8·7, respectively, and added to give the dry‐weight percentages of each species. The dry‐weight‐rank method was tested four times by comparing the results with those of hand‐separating cut samples. No great differences between the two methods were detected when exact rankings, obtained from hand‐separating, were used, and it was found that ranks could be estimated accurately, provided that sufficient training had been given to the observers.
650 $aBotanical composition
650 $aForage evaluation
650 $aPastures
650 $aAnálise
650 $aBotânica
650 $aPastagem
653 $aComposicao
653 $aFeed evaluation
653 $aLeaf dry mass
700 1 $aHAYDOCK, K. P.
773 $tGrass and Forage Science$gv. 18, n. 4, p. 268-275, 1963.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos (CNPC) |
|
