STM Journals Peer-reviewed research from Consortium e-Learning Network

International Journal of Biochemistry and Biomolecule Research Review Article

Temporal Shifts in Forage Quality: Stage of Maturity, Biomass Yield, Performance Matrix, and Ecosystem Responses

  1. Md. Emran Hossain Department of Animal Science and Nutrition
  2. Shilpi Islam Department of Animal Science and Nutrition

Abstract

Forage quality is a key determinant of livestock productivity and environmental sustainability, with its dynamics closely linked to the stage of maturity, biomass yield, and broader ecosystem interactions. This study explores the temporal shifts in forage quality throughout its growth cycle, emphasizing the effects of maturity on nutrient composition, digestibility, and overall biomass yield. The relationship between these factors and their impact on animal performance, including milk yield, growth, and reproductive health, is examined within the context of a performance matrix that integrates nutritional, physiological, and metabolic outcomes. Additionally, the study investigates the broader ecosystem responses, highlighting how maturity stages influence soil health, water retention, and greenhouse gas emissions, alongside other environmental services such as carbon sequestration. The impact of maturity on forage palatability, intake, and digestibility is critically assessed, providing insights into how changes in plant morphology and biochemical composition affect ruminant feed consumption and efficiency. Furthermore, the role of sustainable forage management practices, including optimal harvest timing and soil-plant management, is discussed to enhance both animal productivity and environmental resilience. This review synthesizes current research, identifies knowledge gaps, and offers future directions for advancing forage management strategies aimed at balancing productivity with ecosystem sustainability.

Keywords

References (35)

  1. H. R. Conrad, A. D. Pratt, J. W. Hibbs, and R. R. Davis, “Relationships between forage growth stage, digestibility, nutrition intake and milk production in dairy cows,” 1962.
  2. Y. Xie et al., “Soil bacterial community structure at different plant maturity stages in an annual grass–legume production system,” Front. Sustain. Food Syst., vol. 7, p. 1145488, 2023.
  3. M. Mushtaque, “Influence of maturity on morphological characters and biomass of buffel grass,” Pak. J. Sci., 2010, [Online]. Available: https://nja.pastic.gov.pk/PJS/index.php/PJS/article/view/63
  4. Jung HG, Allen MS. Characteristics of plant cell walls affecting intake and digestibility of forages by ruminants. Journal of Animal Science. 1995;73(9):2774. doi:10.2527/1995.7392774x
  5. J. J. Ni, A. K. Leung, and C. W. W. Ng, “Modelling effects of root growth and decay on soil water retention and permeability,” Can. Geotech. J., vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 1049–1055, 2019.
  6. R. M. Cleale IV and L. S. Bull, “Effect of forage maturity on ration digestibility and production by dairy cows,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 69, no. 6, pp. 1587–1594, 1986.
  7. J. Nair et al., “Effect of variety and stage of maturity at harvest on nutrient and neutral detergent fiber digestibility of forage barley grown in western Canada,” Can. J. Anim. Sci., vol. 98, no. 2, pp. 299–310, 2018.
  8. M. F. Ali and M. Tahir, “An overview on the factors affecting water-soluble carbohydrates concentration during ensiling of silage,” J. Plant Environ., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 63–80, 2021.
  9. R. Lemus, “Mineral Concentrations in Forages,” Mississippi state Univ. Ext. Serv., vol. 11, no. 3, p. 2, 2018.
  10. K. J. Moore, A. W. Lenssen, and S. L. Fales, “Factors affecting forage quality,” 12 | Page Forages Sci. Grassl. Agric., vol. 2, pp. 701–717, 2020.
  11. D. R. Buxton and D. D. Redfearn, “Plant limitations to fiber digestion and utilization,” J. Nutr., vol. 127, no. 5, pp. 814S-818S, 1997.
  12. V. Ishler and G. Varga, “Carbohydrate Nutrition for Lactating Dairy Cattle,” Dep. Dairy Anim. Sci. Pennsylvania State Univ., vol. 29, pp. 1–11, 2001, [Online]. Available: http://www.nutritime.com.br/arquivos_internos/artigosBK/chonutrition.pdf
  13. R. A. Terry and J. M. A. Tilley, “The digestibility of the leaves and stems of perennial ryegrass, cocksfoot, timothy, tall fescue, lucerne and sainfoin, as measured by an in vitro procedure,” Grass Forage Sci., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 363–372, 1964.
  14. Alstrup L, Søegaard K, Weisbjerg MR. Effects of maturity and harvest season of grass-clover silage and of forage-to-concentrate ratio on milk production of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 2016;99(1):328-340. doi:10.3168/jds.2015-9802
  15. D. M. Ball, M. Collins, G. D. Lacefield, and ..., “Understanding forage quality,” Am. Farm Bur. Fed. Publ., vol. 1, no. 01, pp. 1–5, 2001.
  16. Adams DC, Cochran RC, Currie PO. Forage Maturity Effects on Rumen Fermentation, Fluid Flow, and Intake in Grazing Steers. Journal of Range Management. 1987;40(5):404. doi:10.2307/3899597
  17. Kammes KL, Ying Y, Allen MS. Nutrient demand interacts with legume maturity to affect rumen pool sizes in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 2012;95(5):2632-2647. doi:10.3168/jds.2011-4996
  18. M. Rinne, S. Jaakkola, and P. Huhtanen, “Grass maturity effects on cattle fed silage- based diets. 1. Organic matter digestion, rumen fermentation and nitrogen utilization,” Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 1–17, 1997.
  19. Muhonen S, Philippeau C, Julliand V. Effects of Differences in Fibre Composition and Maturity of Forage-Based Diets on the Fluid Balance, Water-Holding Capacity and Viscosity in Equine Caecum and Colon Digesta. Animals. 2022;12(23):3340. doi:10.3390/ani12233340
  20. AGROSAVIA, Vargas JJ, Pabón ML, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Carulla JE, Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Methane production from four forages at three maturity stages in a ruminal in vitro system. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias. 2018;31(2):120-129. doi:10.17533/udea.rccp.v31n2a05
  21. S. Muhonen, S. Sadet-Bourgeteau, and V. Julliand, “Effects of differences in fibre composition and maturity of forage-based diets on the microbial ecosystem and its activity in equine caecum and colon digesta and faeces,” Animals, vol. 11, no. 8, p. 2337, 2021.
  22. Stewart CE, Moturi P, Follett RF, Halvorson AD. Lignin biochemistry and soil N determine crop residue decomposition and soil priming. Biogeochemistry. 2015;124(1-3):335-351. doi:10.1007/s10533-015-0101-8
  23. T. Roth and J. Waite, “Early Spring Carbon to Nitrogen Ratios of Cereal Rye Varieties,” no. May, pp. 1–10, 2021.
  24. Tuure J, Räsänen M, Hautala M, Pellikka P, Mäkelä PSA, Alakukku L. Plant residue mulch increases measured and modelled soil moisture content in the effective root zone of maize in semi-arid Kenya. Soil and Tillage Research. 2021;209:104945. doi:10.1016/j.still.2021.104945
  25. M. Shibata and F. Terada, “Factors affecting methane production and mitigation in ruminants,” Anim. Sci. J., vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 2–10, 2010, doi:10.1111/j.1740- 0929.2009.00687.x.
  26. Rivera JE, Chará J. CH4 and N2O Emissions From Cattle Excreta: A Review of Main Drivers and Mitigation Strategies in Grazing Systems. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. 2021;5. doi:10.3389/fsufs.2021.657936
  27. C. Evangelista, M. Milanesi, D. Pietrucci, G. Chillemi, and U. Bernabucci, “Enteric 13 | Page methane emission in livestock sector: Bibliometric research from 1986 to 2024 with text mining and topic analysis approach by machine learning algorithms,” Animals, vol. 14, no. 21, p. 3158, 2024.
  28. P. Rowley-Conwy and R. Layton, “Foraging and farming as niche construction: stable and unstable adaptations,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci., vol. 366, no. 1566, pp. 849–862, 2011.
  29. P. E. Hulme and C. W. Benkman, “Granivory,” Plant–animal Interact. an Evol. approach, pp. 185–208, 2002.
  30. Woodcock BA, Savage J, Bullock JM, Nowakowski M, Orr R, Tallowin JRB, et al. Enhancing floral resources for pollinators in productive agricultural grasslands. Biological Conservation. 2014;171:44-51. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.01.023
  31. J. Soroka and J. Otani, “Arthropods of Legume Forage Crops,” Arthropods Can. grasslands. Vol. 2 inhabitants a Chang. landscape. [Biological Surv. Canada Monogr. Ser. No 4.], vol. 2, pp. 239–264, 2011.
  32. M. A. Bal, J. G. Coors, and R. D. Shaver, “Impact of the maturity of corn for use as silage in the diets of dairy cows on intake, digestion, and milk production,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 80, no. 10, pp. 2497–2503, 1997.
  33. I. Filya, “Nutritive value and aerobic stability of whole crop maize silage harvested at four stages of maturity,” Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., vol. 116, no. 1–2, pp. 141–150, 2004.
  34. Balehegn M, Ayantunde A, Amole T, Njarui D, Nkosi BD, Müller FL, et al. Forage conservation in sub‐Saharan Africa: Review of experiences, challenges, and opportunities. Agronomy Journal. 2021;114(1):75-99. doi:10.1002/agj2.20954
  35. W. K. Coblentz and M. S. Akins, “Silage review: Recent advances and future technologies for baled silages,” J. Dairy Sci., vol. 101, no. 5, pp. 4075–4092, 2018.