The nutritional value of low lathyrogenic Lathyrus (Lathyrus sativus) for growing chicks

1. The feeding value of new low β‐N‐oxalyl‐amino‐L‐alanine (BOAA) lines of Lathyrus sativus (lathyrus) and the benefits of dehulling the seed or of pre‐adapting chicks to lathyrus‐based diets were examined in several experiments.

2. Chicks fed on diets containing 400 g/kg of the low (1.3 g BOAA/kg seed) and medium (2.2 g BOAA/kg seed) BOAA lines did not differ (P>0.05) in weight gain (WG) or in apparent fat and protein digestibilities compared to birds fed on a wheat‐based diet.

3. Consumption of 600 g low BOAA lathyrus/kg diet caused a slight, but significant (P< 0.05), decrease in WG. Food efficiency decreased as the amount of dietary lathyrus was increased, suggesting that lathyrus may contain an antinutritive factor(s) other than BOAA.

4. Removal of the hull (70 g hull/kg seed) from the seed did not affect chick performance (P> 0.05).

5. Pre‐adapting chicks for 7 d to diets containing up to 600 g medium line lathyrus/kg diet did not reduce the detrimental effects of the lathyrus.

6. Although dehulling and pre‐adaptation of chicks to lathyrus were not beneficial, the low and medium lines of lathyrus tested show potential for use in chick diets up to at least 400 g lathyrus/kg diet.     

Comparison of German and Swiss Rainfall Simulators - Utility,Labour Demands and Costs

The utility, vehicle required, the time needed for assembly and relocation and the costs associated with six different rainfall simulators were studied. The results can be summarized as follows:

• 1 The simulator designed by Kainz & Eicher (1990) is the least expensive to operate. This simulator also has excellent experimental versatility. Its only restriction is a short slope length.
• 2 The rainfall simulator of Karl & Toldrian (1973) is also inexpensive to operate, but because of disadvantages such as low falling height, wind susceptibility, and the need for more workers than other simulators, it should be used mainly where other simulators are not practical (forests, steep slopes, or long slopes).
• 3 The rainfall simulator of Richter et al. (1988) has limited mobility in the field and is highly susceptible to wind drift. Moreover, its narrow plots do not cover a representative unit of a cultivated field.
• 4 The modified Swanson-type simulator (Auerswald, (1986) is suitable for large plots if a sufficient water supply is available.
• 5 The simulator of Kromer & Vöhringer (1988) has the highest fixed costs, but labour is used efficiently.
• 6 The simulator of Schmidt (1983) can only be considered for stationary use because of its long assembly time. Other disadvantages are narrow plot size and high wind susceptibility.

Depending on the selection of the simulator, total costs of between 400 DM and 2000 DM per plot should be expected even with high use rates.     

Vermehrte Pflanzenschäden,Folge örtlicher Klimaänderungen?

Ohne Zusammenfassung