HALLING  Magnus A.

English

紀要類 (bulletin)Symposium Paperdepartmental bulletin pape

HALLING, Magnus A.

Tohoku University Repository (TOUR) / 東北大学機関リポジトリ

Forage Production, Utilization andEnvironmental Conservation in Sweden著者 HALLING  Magnus A.journal orpublication titleJournal of Integrated Field Sciencevolume 8page range 7-12year 2011-03URL http://hdl.handle.net/10097/503877Symposium PaperForage Production, Utilization and Environmental Conservation in SwedenMagnus A. HALLINGDepartment of Crop Production Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences,Box 7043, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Swedene-Mail: Magnus.Halling@slu.seKeywords: Grassland, forage production, species, mixtures, statistics, environment, SwedenReceived 24 December 2010; accepted 7 February 2011AbstractThere are totally 1.5 million ha of grassland in Sweden of which 70 percent is temporary in rotations on arable land. Temporary grassland is the dominat-ing crop with 40 percent of the arable cropping area. The climate is cold temperate and winter damages are common in the grasslands. In the North, where farming is done up to 66˚N latitude, light conditions are extreme, which gives higher energy content in the forage. Timothy (Phleum pratense L.), meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis L.) and red clover (Trifo-lium pratense L.) are the dominating species. Con-trary to the intensive grasslands in Europe, it is very common to use a mixture with grasses and legumes. Silage maize can only be grown in very south where the temperature sum is high enough. The area of silage maize is rapidly increasing due to new vari-eties. Larger milk yield per cow has increased the requirement for herbage with higher nutrient quality. This has lead to earlier cuts and increasing number of cuts. Due to the long winter season a large part of the forage is conserved as silage. In 2009, Sweden had about 350 000 dairy cows on nearly 6 000 farms. About ten percent of the milk farms have organic production. Efforts to reduce N-losses to the environ-ment are done by developing grazing systems and total feeding rations that increase N utilization. Also slurry injection into grassland has advantages over slurry spreading as it decreases ammonia losses and odour and improves forage hygiene.ClimateSweden is situated between the latitudes 55˚N and 69˚N and the climate is cold temperate and winter damages are common in the grasslands, especially in red clover. In the North, light conditions are extreme, which gives higher energy content in the forage. Due to the long winter season a large part of the forage is conserved as silage.The forage production in SwedenThere are totally 1.5 million ha of grassland in Swe-den of which 70 percent is temporary in rotations on arable land (Table 1). This proportion is much higher than in many other European countries (Søegaard et al., 2007). Temporary grassland is the dominating JIFS, 8 : 7  12 (2011)Table 1. Arable grassland permanent grassland and other arable crops in Sweden 2005-2010 in million ha. Source Swedish Agricultural Board (2010).Crop 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010*Cereals 1.01 0.96 0.97 1.09 1.05 0.97Arable grassland 1.03 1.06 1.08 1.11 1.18 1.21Permanent grassland 0.51 0.51 0.49 0.46 0.44 0.45Others 0.67 0.64 0.59 0.43 0.42 0.44Total area 3.22 3.17 3.14 3.09 3.08 3.08Permanent grassland, percent 16 16 16 15 14 15*Preliminary values8crop with about 40 percent of the arable cropping area (Table 2). Interestingly this percentage has steadily increased the last six years. The temporary grasslands in Sweden are mainly established in the spring and cut two-three times during two-four years (Søegaard, 2007). Larger milk yield per cow has increased the requirement for herbage with higher nutrient quality. This has lead to earlier cuts and increasing number of cuts. Silage maize has been a very minor crop in Sweden so far in area compared to the temporary grassland. The silage maize can only be grown in very south where the temperature sum is high enough. But the last ten years the area under silage maize has in-creased more than ﬁ ve times as seen in Table 2. An important factor in this change has been new released varieties, which are better adapted to the climate. HallingTable 2. Arable grassland and other arable crops in Sweden 2001-2010 in million ha. Source Swedish Agricul-tural Board (2010).Crop 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010*Cereals 1.15 1.11 1.13 1.11 1.01 0.96 0.97 1.09 1.05 0.97Arable grassland 0.93 0.94 0.93 0.93 1.03 1.06 1.08 1.11 1.18 1.21Others 0.62 0.63 0.61 0.62 0.67 0.64 0.59 0.43 0.42 0.44Total arable land 2.69 2.68 2.67 2.66 2.70 2.66 2.65 2.63 2.64 2.63Arable grassland, percent 35 35 35 35 38 40 41 42 44 46Silage maize, thousand ha 3.0 3.9 4.0 5.3 5.8 7.5 10.8 13.1 16.1 16.5*Preliminary valuesTable 3. Forage species used in Swedish grasslands Perennial forage legume species  Perennial forage grass species M Red clover (Trifolium pratense L.) M Timothy (Phleum pratense L.) M White clover (Trifolium repens L.) M Meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis Hudson.) Lucerne (Medicago sativa L.) Perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) Alsike clover (Trifolium hybridum L.) Festulolium (Festulolium) Bird’s foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.) Hybrid ryegrass (Lolium x boucheanum)Italian ryegrass (Lolium multifl orum Lam.)Cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata L.)Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.)   Red fescue (Festuca rubra L.) M= main speciesThe number of species used in the Swedish grass-lands are high, especially the number of grass species (Table 3). Species marked with M are main species in Sweden according to Søegaard (2007). These species are also dominating in Norway and Finland. When moving more south in Europe, perennial ryegrass and white clover then becomes the main species. Among the grasses, there is an increasing use of perennial ryegrass and festulolium in Sweden, especially in more favourable locations.The type of farming varies a lot in Sweden, which is illustrated by Figure 1. Most grassland on arable land (28 %) is found is on the high lands in the south Sweden, indicated by animal production dominat-ing symbol on the map. This area, which goes across Sweden, is popular called the Animal belt.  9The dairy and animal production in SwedenIn 2009, Sweden had 357 000 dairy cows on 5 883 farms (Table 4), which means that an average farm had about 60 dairy cows in 2009. There has been for a long time a change to larger farms. The amount of Forage Production, Utilization and Environmental Conservation in SwedenFig. 1. Dominating type of farms in different regions in Sweden. From Statistics Sweden (2010) page 44.Table 4. Structure of dairy sector in Sweden in January 2010. Source: The Swedish Dairy Association (2010).Description ValueNumber of dairy companies 21Number of processing plants 36Number of livestock cooperatives 7Number of semen-producing companies 2Number of breed societies 9Number of dairy farmers 5 883of which organic 512Number of dairy cows (June 2009, thousands) 357Average of cows per herd 59Total milk delivered Mkg (2009) 2926organic produced milk is increasing and in January 2010 about ten percent of the milk farms have or-ganic production (Table 4).In Table 5, the number of bovine animals, sheep’s and lambs in 2007 are reported. Note the decrease in number of dairy cows between 2009 and 2007 (Table 4 and 5).Seed mixtures in grasslandsContrary to the intensive grasslands in Europe, it is very common to use a mixture with grasses and le-gumes in Sweden. In Table 6, two examples are given of mixtures from a seed company in Sweden (SW Seed, 2008). SW 932 in this example is robust mix-ture for cutting leys with 2-3 harvests per year. SW Ares is a new sustainable variety bread for southern Sweden. SW 843 on the contrary, is a mixture for an intensive and high production meaning 3-4 harvests per year ore combined with grazing. It has two vari-eties of perennial ryegrass, two of timothy and two of meadow fescue, which are of different types and make the mixture more ﬂ exible. Diversity of clover species in grass-clover swards can contribute in ﬁ rst hand to the stability of yield, but does not always mean greater herbage yields (Frankow-Lindberg et al., 2009).Natural grasslands The area of semi-natural grasslands in Sweden has been decreasing for a long time in Sweden. In a survey, based on old maps, it was calculated that dur-10Table 5. Livestock numbers in 1 000 head in year 2007Description 1 000 headDairy cows 370Suckler cows 186Total cows 556Heifers, bulls and steers older than one year 516Calves younger than one year 489Total bovine animals 1 560Ewes and rams 242Lambs 267Total sheep and lambs 509Table 6. Example of two seed mixtures from a seed company in Sweden. The per-cent is the seed weight in the mixture. The variety name is before the name of the speciesSW 843 Intensive South SW 932 All round Basic3 % Sara red clover 5 % SW Ares red clover3 % SW Ares red clover 5 % Sara red clover4 % Ramona white clover 65 % Ragnar timothy20 % Ragnar timothy 25 % Sigmund meadow fescue15 % Grindstad timothy15 % Sigmund meadow fescue10 % Tyko meadow fescue10 % Malta perennial ryegrass10 % Leia perennial ryegrass10 % Storm hybrid ryegrass  ing the last 200 years in 12 landscapes in South-east Sweden, the land-cover of semi-natural grasslands has decreased from 83% to 17% (Cousins, 2009). In a ﬁ eld survey, the semi-natural grasslands in these 12 landscapes had a species richness of 9-29 species m2.Environmental conservationThe ecological value and the food production pos-sibilities of the agricultural landscape and the agri-cultural land are protected in Sweden. In 1999, the Swedish Parliament adopted 15 national environmen-tal quality objectives, and one more has been added since then. These objectives describe what character-istics the natural and cultural environment must have for a more sustainable development of the society. Among the 15 goals, these three objectives apply to the agriculture: • a varied agricultural landscape• zero eutrophication• a non-toxic environment.These three objectives include the following:– Existing biodiversity must be preserved by long-term management strategies.– Small biotopes are to be preserved and also cre-ated in the plain districts.– Nutrient leaching and use of chemical plant pro-tection products shall be reduced.The objectives shall be reached through legislation, ﬁ nancial instruments, information, extension services, and training.Halling11Efforts to reduce N-losses to the environment are done by develop grazing systems and total feeding ra-tions that increase N utilization. To improve the tech-nique of spreading the manure is also important. Slur-ry injection into grassland has advantages over slurry spreading as it decreases ammonia losses and odour and improves forage hygiene, but it can increase the nitrous oxide (N2O) production. However, in spite of the reduction in ammonia emissions, Rodhe et al. Fig. 2. Different techniques for injecting manure into a grassland sward.(2006) reported little or no effect on yield from the injection technique compared with surface spreading. The most common explanation given for this is that damage to the grass sward caused by injector tools balances out the larger amount of ammonium nitro-gen left after slurry injection. If the injection equip-ment as shown in Fig. 2 is used without slurry, a yield reduction up to 3-9% can occur (Rodhe and Halling, 2010).ReferencesCousins, S.A.O. (2009) Landscape history and soil properties affect grassland decline and plant spe-cies richness in rural landscapes. Biological Con-servation, 142: 2752-2758.Frankow-Lindberg B.E., M. Halling, M. Höglind and J. Forkman (2009) Yield and yield stability of single- and multi-legume grass-clover swards in two contrasting environments. Grass and Forage Science, 64, 236-245.Halling, M. A. and L. Rodhe (2010). Grassland yield response to knife/tine slurry injection equipment – benefit or crop damage? Grassland Science in Europe: 15: 175-177.  SW Seed (2008).  SW Val-laktuellt – Grassland News 2008. Rodhe L., M. Pell and S. Yamulki (2006) Nitrous oxide, methane and ammonia emissions following slurry spreading on grassland. Soil Use and Man-agement 22: 229-237.Søegaard, K., M. Geirus, A. Hopkins and M. Halling (2007) Temporary grassland – challenges in the future. Grassland Sciences in Europe, 12: 27-38.Statistics Sweden (2010) Yearbook of agricultural statistics 2010 including food statistics. http://www.scb.se/Pages/PublishingCalendarViewIn-fo____259923.aspx?PublObjId=13495 (date of access: September 11, 2010)Swedish Agricultural Board (2009) Facts about Swedish agriculture. http://www2.jordbruksver-Forage Production, Utilization and Environmental Conservation in Sweden12ket.se/webdav/files/SJV/trycksaker/Pdf_ovrigt/ovr2gb.pdf (date of access: September 11, 2010)Swedish Agricultural Board (2010) Action pro-gramme for reducing plant nutrient losses from agriculture. http://www2.jordbruksverket.se/web-dav/files/SJV/trycksaker/Pdf_ovrigt/ovr138ENG.pdf (date of access: September 11, 2010)Swedish Agricultural Board (2010) Use of agricul-tural land in 2010, Preliminary results (JO 10 SM 1002). http://www.sjv.se/webdav/ﬁ les/SJV/Amne-somraden/Statistik%2C%20fakta/Arealer/JO10/JO10SM1002/JO10SM1002_inEnglish.htm (date of access: September 11, 2010)The Swedish Dairy Association (2010) Milk - key ﬁ gures Sweden. www.svenskmjolk.se. (date of ac-cess: August 17, 2010)Halling

Forage Production, Utilization and Environmental Conservation in Sweden

Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)

https://tohoku.repo.nii.ac.jp/?action=repository_action_common_download&item_id=64251&item_no=1&attribute_id=18&file_no=1

Forage Production, Utilization and Environmental Conservation in Sweden

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Tohoku University Repository (TOUR) / 東北大学機関リポジトリ

Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)