Welcome to International Network for Natural Sciences | INNSpub

Morphological characteristics and biomass yieldof fifteen novel germplasm of wheat for ruminant livestock, in Northern Pakistan

Research Paper | January 1, 2021

| Download 9

Syed Muhammad Sulaiman, Nazir Ahmad Khan, Nazir Ahmad

Key Words:

Int. J. Biosci.18( 1), 145-150, January 2021

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12692/ijb/18.1.145-150


IJB 2021 [Generate Certificate]


This study investigated the genetic variation in morphological characteristics and forage biomass yield of fifteen promising novel germplasm of wheat. GenotypesSup152, Croc, Kinde01, BAU, Millat, Bramblin, Kite6, Brambling, Khvaki, Baj, Kachu, Tilhi, Crow, Yaco and CNO79 of wheat were grown in four replicate plots (3m × 1.5 m) according to the randomized complete block design. Uniform standard agronomic, irrigation and weeds control practices were adapted for all plots. Samples were collected from 1 m long randomly selected strip of two consecutive middle rows of each plot. For the measurement of leaves and stem portion, subsamples of 10 plants were randomly selected from each sample, weighed, and then leaves and stem portion were separated by hand and weighed. Large variation (P ˂ 0.001) was recorded in the fresh biomass yield, dry matter yield and morphological characteristics within the fifteen-novel germplasm of wheat. The yields of fresh biomass ranged 21166 to 24405 kg/ha and dry matter from 4234 to 6882 kg/ha. There was large variation (P < 0.001) in the percentage of leaves (31 to 42%), leaf to stem ratio (0.44 to 0.81) and plant height (68.9 to 81.3 cm). Among the 15- novel germplasm of wheat Sup 154 produced the highest fresh biomass yield, dry matter yield and percentage of leaves and lowest leaf to stem ratio. Other novel germplasm which had similar promising forage characteristic are placed in order of merit as Kinde, Bau, Millat and Bramblin.


Copyright © 2021
By Authors and International Network for
Natural Sciences (INNSPUB)
This article is published under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution Liscense 4.0

Morphological characteristics and biomass yieldof fifteen novel germplasm of wheat for ruminant livestock, in Northern Pakistan

Alemayehu N, Becker H. 2002. Genotypic diversity and patterns of variation in a germplasm material of Ethiopian mustard (Brassica carinataA. Braun). Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 49(6), 573-582.

Bezabih M, Adie A, Ravi D, Prasad KVSV, Jones C, Abeyo B, Tadesse Z, Zegeye H, Solomon T, Blümmel M. 2018. Variations in food-fodder traits of bread wheat cultivars released for the Ethiopian highlands. Field Crops Research 229, 1-7.

Bisht J, Kant L, Srivastva A. 2008. Cutting management of dual purpose wheat cultivars: A new approach for increasing fodder availability. Cereal Research Communications 36(1), 177-187.

Cash D, Carlstrom R, Surber L, Hafl A. 2007. Forage yield and quality of ‘Willow Creek’forage winter wheat. Montana State University Extension Service. Bozeman, USA.

Economic Survey of Pakistan. 2017-18. Finance Division Economic Advisor’s Wing, Islamabad.

Habib G, Khan MFU, Javaid S, Saleem M. 2016. Assessment of feed supply and demand for livestock in Pakistan. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology A, 6, 191-202.

Habib G, Shah SBA, Inayat K. 1995. Genetic variation in morphological characteristics, chemical composition and in vitro digestibility of straw from different wheat cultivars. Animal Feed Science and Technology 55(3-4), 263-274.

Khan NA, Sulaiman SM, Hashmi MS, Rahman SU, Cone JW. 2020. Chemical composition, ruminal degradation kinetics, and methane production (in vitro) of winter grass species. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 101(1), 179-184.

Kim KS, Anderson JD, Newell MA, Butler TJ. 2016. Variations of forage yield and nutritive value in winter rye germplasm. Crop Science 56(3), 1018-1024.

MacKown CT, Carver BF, Edwards JT. 2011. Variation in crude protein and in vitro dry matter digestion of wheat forage. Crop science 51(2), 878-891.

Murphy SP, Allen LH. 2003. Nutritional importance of animal source foods. The Journal of nutrition 133(11), 3932S-3935S.

Nasim W, Ahmad A, Wajid SA, Hussain A, Khaliq T, Usman M, Hammad HM, Sultana SR, Mubeen M, Ahmad S. 2010. Simulation of different wheat cultivars under agro-ecological condition of Faisalabad-Pakistan. Crop Environment 1, 44-48.

Rosegrant MW, McIntyre BD, HerrenHR, Wakhungu J, Watson RT. 2009. Looking into the future for agriculture and AKST. Agricultural Knowledge Science and Technology, 307–376.

Sarwar M, Khan MA, Iqbal Z. 2002. Status paper feed resources for livestock in Pakistan. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 4(1), 186-192.

Shahzad K, Bakht J, Shah WA, Shafi M, Jabeen N. 2002. Yield and yield components of various wheat cultivars as affected by different sowing dates. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences 1(5), 522-525.

Shuja MN, Dure-Nayab AM, Iqbal A, Khalil IH. 2010. Evaluating the response of wheat genotypes to forage clipping. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 12(1), 111-114.