Article Sidebar

Download
Statistic
Read Counter : 5

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

The research aimed to study the effect of three different paddock management systems on nitrogen and mineral status of soil, plant diversity, and biomass production and to discuss the potential nutritional effects of macro mineral profiles of dominant forages on grazing cattle. The research was conducted in a Completely Randomized Design (CRD) 3x4, consisting of 3 paddocks as treatments and four plots as replicates. The pasture was divided into three paddocks based on shading conditions and mowing frequency: P1: unshaded by trees and rarely mowed; P2: unshaded but regularly mowed; and P3: shaded by numerous trees and never mowed. Each paddock was divided into four plots based on plant density, with plant and soil samples collected at 17 sampling points per plot. Measured parameters included botanical composition, dominant species, dry matter, and macro mineral concentration of calcium, sodium, phosphorus, sulfur, magnesium, and potassium in the soils and dominant forages. The grazing pasture was inhabited by around 110 native plant species, dominated by Imperata cylindrica (19.6%), Axonopus compressus (16.8%), Mimosa pudica (12.1%), Digitaria sanguinalis (10%), Elephantopus mollis (9.0%), and Euphorbia hirta (8.5%). Biomass production ranged from 110–135 kg/ha/day, with a carrying capacity of 2.5–3.0 AU/ha (significant at p<0.05). Different mowing frequency and shading conditions influenced soil nutrient concentrations, forage diversity, and productivity. Considering requirements for growing cattle, the dominant species had a favorable content in Mg, K, and S but was deficient in P, Na, and Ca. In conclusion, the grazing pasture was populated by diverse native forage plants, and the dominant species were poor in several essential minerals of P, Na, and Ca, which are most likely to limit cattle productivity.

Keywords

botanical composition dominant species grazing cattle macro minerals pasture

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Jurnal Sain Peternakan Indonesia

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The author who submits the manuscript must understand and agree that Jurnal Sain Peternakan Indonesia holds the copyrights published. Copyright includes rights to reproduce, distribute and sell every part of journal articles in all forms and media. This is a copyright transfer form (Download) signed by the corresponding author.

All articles published in Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows:

• Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA)

Creative Commons License

Jurnal Sain Peternakan Indonesia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

You are free to:

Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format

Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material

for any purpose, even commercially.

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms if you follow the license terms.

How to Cite
Visrialty, I., Ananta, D., Suyitman, S., & Khalil, K. (2025). The Effect of Shading Conditions and Mowing Frequency on Plant Diversity, Productivity, Soil Nitrogen and Mineral, and Mineral Profiles of Dominant Forages of Grazing Pasture. Jurnal Sain Peternakan Indonesia, 20(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.31186/jspi.id.20.1.1-11
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (AOAC). 2016. Official analysis methods of AOAC. International 20th Ed Maryland USA.
  2. Berutu R, P. Sardilla, Evitayani, Ifradi and Khalil. 2016. Analysis of the potency and quality of wild forages growing at the Limau Manis campus of Andalas University, Padang (In Indonesian). Pastura, 5 (2) : 121 – 127. Doi: 10.24843/Pastura.2016.v05.i02.p13
  3. Bomanowska, A., W. Adamowski, K Kwiecień and A Rewicz. 2019. The effects of different mowing regimes on diversity of grasses in lowland meadows. Turk J Bot. 43: 80-89. Doi:10.3906/bot-1807-33.
  4. Eviati and Sulaeman. 2012. Technical Guide Issue II Chemical Analysis of Soil, Plants, Water, and Fertilizer. Agency for Agricultural Research and Development, Ministry of Agriculture Republic Indonesia.
  5. Fitri N, Khalil and Khasrad. 2024. The effect of providing preserved straw with shell calcite and stone preservatives on the performance of Pesisir cattle raised under a tethering system (in Indonesian). Undergraduate thesis. Faculty of Animal Science. Andalas University.
  6. Infitria and Khalil. 2014. Study of production and quality of forages in grassland land, Livestock Production Unit (UPT Peternakan), Andalas University, Padang (in Indonesian). Buletin Ilmu Makanan Ternak, 101:4-14.
  7. ISRIC (International Soil Reference and Information Center). 2002. Procedures for soil analysis. ISRIC Technical Paper.
  8. Khalil. 2016. Crude nutrient and mineral composition of Asystasia gangetica (L.) as a predominant forage species for feeding of goats. Pakistan J. Nutrition 15 (9): 867-872.
  9. Khalil, M. N. Lestari, P. Sardilla, and Hermon. 2015. The use of local mineral formulas as a feed block supplement for beef cattle fed on wild forages. Media Peternakan, April 2015, 38(1):34-41. DOI: 10.5398/medpet.2015.38.1.34.
  10. Maathuis, F.J.M. 2009. Physiological functions of mineral macronutrients. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 12 (3): 250-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2009.04.003
  11. McDowell, L.R. 1985. Detection of mineral status of grazing ruminants. In: McDowell LR editor. Nutrition of grazing ruminants in warm climates. Florida. USA: Academic Press, Inc; 1985:339-357.
  12. McDowell, L.R. 1997. Minerals for Grazing Ruminants in Tropical Regions. 3rd Ed. Department of Animal Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville. P. 81.
  13. McDowell, L.R., J.H. Conrad and F.G. Hembry. 1993. Mineral for Grazing Ruminants in Tropical Regions. Univ. of Florida, Gainesville.
  14. Nadeem, F., M. A. Hanif, M.I. Majeed and Z. Mushtaq. 2018.Role of macronutrients and micronutrients in the growth and development of plants and prevention of deleterious plant diseases – A comprehensive review. IJCBS, 13(2018):31-52.
  15. National Research Council (NRC). 2000. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. 7th. Revised Edition. Washington: National Academy of Sciences, National Academic Press.
  16. Rhue, R.D. and D. Kidder. 1983. Analytical procedures used by the IFAS extension soil laboratory and the interpretation of results. Soil Sci Dept. Univ of Florida, Gainesville. USA. 1983.
  17. Sharma MC, Joshi C, Das G, Hussain K. 2007. Mineral nutrition and reproductive performance of the dairy animals: a review. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 77: 599-608.
  18. Sharma R.K., M. S. Cox, C. Oglesby and J. S. Dhillon.2024. Revisiting the role of sulfur in crop production: A narrative review. J.Agric. Food Res. 15:101013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101013.
  19. Soetan KO, Olaiya CO, Oyewole OE. 2010. The importance of mineral elements for humans, domestic animals and plants: A review. African Journal of Food Science. 4(5): 200−222.
  20. Spehn, E.M, M. Scherer-Lorenzen, B. Schmid, A. Hector, M. C. Caldeira, P. G. Dimitrakopoulos, J. A. Finn, A. Jumpponen, G. O’Donnovan, J. S. Pereira, E.-D. Schulze, A. Y. Troumbis and C. Ko¨rner. 2002. The role of legumes as a component of biodiversity in a cross-European study of grassland biomass nitrogen. OIKOS 98: 205–218.
  21. Suttle, N.F. 2010. Mineral Nutrition of Livestock. CABI Wallington. 2010: 122-167.
  22. Wu, G. 2018. Principles of Animal Nutrition. CRC Press. 2018:553-632
  23. Yasothai Y. 2014. Importance of minerals on reproduction in dairy cattle. International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology. 3(6): 2051–2057.