EFFECTS OF MINERAL AND ORGANIC FERTILISATION ON BIOMASS PRODUCTION AND FLORISTIC COMPOSITION IN A Festuca valesiaca L. GRASSLAND Ciobanu C.

1*, Vntu V.1, Sa ui! C.1, Po"o#i$i I. C.1 an% Sta#a&a$'( M.1
1

University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine, Iai, 700490, Iai, Ro ania * Corresponding author:ci!ryan"cio#anu$ya%oo&co

Abstract Mineral and organic fertilization of grasslands is the main way to increase the yield of dry matter and floristic diversity in Moldavia forest steppe. Application of organic and mineral fertilizers for a long time resulted in a high meadow biodiversity in the study area. The objective of our work is to analyze the effect of manure in combination with mineral fertilizers on biomass productivity and phytodiversity of 'estuca valesiaca grasslands. The obtained DM yields were influenced by climatic conditions, type and level of organic and mineral fertilization and the highest yields were obtained at the fertilization with ! t ha"# manure every years $ %)* + )* &,-. The obtained results have shown the positive effects of fertilization on productivity, floristic diversity and canopy structure of the studied permanent grassland. Keywords. seminatural grassland, floristic diversity, canopy structure, species evolution INTRODUCTION 'eyond their contributions to the production of meat and milk, permanent grassland offers a number of social and environmental benefits. (ompared to arable land, grassland helps to improve soil conservation against erosion, reduces nutrient leaching into groundwater and surface )*+ntu *. et al., ,!!-. and contributes to flood control. /n the debate on climate change caused by global warming, meadows were classified as an important carbon sink by storing in a greater 0uantity in comparison with arable land )/&((, ,!!!.. Moreover, the meadows are a characteristic element of the 1uropean cultural landscape, playing an important role in maintaining semi"natural habitats, using traditional agricultural practices vital for biodiversity protection )2danowicz, ,!!3.. /mproving soil nutrient regime by organic fertilization causes changes in floristic composition and the ratio between valuable species. &rincipalele motoare ale schimb4rii biodiversit45ii sunt schimbarea utiliz4rii terenurilor )inclusiv urbanizare i abandonarea terenurilor., schimb4rile climatice, fragmentarea, depunerile de azot etc. 6chimbarea destinaiei terenurilor este o tendin54 important4 a modific4rii biodiversit4ii 7i de e8emplu, arii naturale sunt transformate +n zone agricole sau urbane )6A9A et al., ,!!!: T/9MA% et al., ,!!#.. 6chimb4rile climatice +ncep s4 afecteze biodiversitatea i cum este de ateptat se va provoca o pierdere

semnificativ4 a biodiversit4ii +n viitorul apropiat )T;<MA6 et al., ,!!-.. The diminution of the productive potential of the permanent grasslands from north"eastern =omania, which are found at a percent of over >!? on slope fields, is caused by erosion, but unfavorable climatic conditions and their wrong management may also be added )6amuil (. et al., ,!#!.. MATERIALS AND MET/ODS This e8periment, set on a meadow of 'estuca valesiaca 9. in the forest steppe of Moldavia is situated on a slightly sloping ground, with %1 orientation, chernozem soil type, weakly leachate, with loam"clay te8ture, humus content of -., to -.@? medium supplied with mobile phosphorus ) !" > ppm. and very well supplied with mobile potassium ), 3" ,! ppm.., p; A.3 to A.B in !",! cm soil layer. The e8periment is monofactorial, set up by the method of randomized blocks in three replicates with the objective of studying the role of organic and mineral fertilizers combined in different doses in increasing forage production and improving floristic composition. Ce used the following fertilization ratesD *# " unfertilized control, *, " #! t ha"# cattle manure annually $ & A %3!, * " #! t ha"# cattle manure annually $ %3!$3! &>,: *- " ,! t ha"# cattle manure applied at , years $ %3! & A, *3 " ,! t ha"# cattle manure applied at years $ %3!$3! &>,, *A " ! t ha"# cattle manure applied at years $ %3! & A, *> " ! t ha"# cattle manure applied at years $ %3!$3! &>,, *@ " -! t ha"# cattle manure applied at years $ %3! & A, *B " -! t

ha"# cattle manure applied at years $ %3!$3! &>,. (attle manure was applied in the fall annually )#! t ha"#., at , years ),! t ha"#. and at years ) !"-! t ha"#., nitrogen fertilizers were applied in spring, at the start of vegetation, and the phosphorus in the fall. (attle manure used had the following compositionD %"!,--3 ?, &,<3"!,,#, ? and E,<"!,AB3 ?. 6ampling and vegetation studies were done in earring"flowering of dominant grasses: the results were interpreted statistically by analysis of variance and limit differences. Floristic studies were carried out with 'raun" 'lan0uet method. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 9ow productive permanent meadow fertilization with organic and mineral fertilizers had a positive effect on increasing and improving floristic composition. &roduction level was different depending on the doses used and combinations thereof. &asture fertilization with #! t ha"# manure in combination with %3! & A determined a high biomass yield ) .AA t ha" # ., representing an increase of >B ? compared to the control )ta#le 1.. Chen applying additional dose of %3!, after the first cut, production has not increased, because the nitrogen cannot be used by plants due to drought. &roduction growth in this case was only @A ?. Fertilization with ,! t ha"# farmyard manure and & A %3! determined a production growth of only ?, and the association with %3! $ 3! &>,, the increase was -A?. Application of ! t ha"# manure with two doses of fertilizers, production increases were > "#!!? and fertilization with -! t ha"# manure with two doses of mineral fertilizers, production increases were -#"-A?.

Table # The influence of organic and mineral fertilization rates on dry matter )DM. yield in ,!#,
P&o%u$tion F(&ti!i0ation #a&iant DM t 'a31 4 Gnfertilized plot )control plot. ,.!3 #!! #! t ha"# manure every year $ %3! & A .AA #>B "# #! t ha manure every year $ %3! $ 3! &>, .B# #B! ,! t ha"# manure every , years $ %)* + )* &,.!! #-A ! t ha"# manure every years $ %)* &56: .33 #> "# ! t ha manure every years $ %)* + )* &,-.#, ,!! -! t ha"# manure every years $ %)* &56 ,.@@ #-# "# -! t ha manure every years $ %)* + )* &,,.BB #-A (S) *+ , 0&*0 t %a-1. (S) 1+ , 0&/9 t %a-1. (S) 0,1+ , 0&9* t %a-1 Di11(&(n$( t 'a31 " #.A# #.@A !.B3 #.3! ,.!> !.@ !.B-

Si2ni1i$an$( HHH HHH HHH HHH HHH HH HH

%ote that production increases in application !"-! t ha"# manure were due mostly on behalf of the organic fertilizer, mineral fertilizers had little influence because of lack of precipitation nitrogen and phosphorus did not enter the plant nutrient cycle. Floristic structure was slightly modified as a result of fertilization. /t was found that the largest share of floristic structure have grasses )3#"@!?. as the

highest value were recorded in the variant fertilized with ! t ha"# manure combined with &>, %3! $ 3! )>-"@!?. )'igure 1.. <ther botanical families are represented by a small percentage )##",#.3?. it showing an improved pasture forage value from this point of view. The proportion of legume species was @",>? higher in variants *B ),-?., *3 ),A?. and *@ ),>?. and lowest in *> )@?. and * , *- )##?..

Figure #. /nfluence of organic and mineral fertilization on floristic composition

/n floristic composition were determined B species of perennial grasses, #- species of legumes and 3 species from other botanical

families )ta#le 0.. (overage of meadow vegetation is very good )B@"#!!?..

Table , /nfluence of organic and mineral fertilization on floristic composition

S"($i(7 Agro!yron re!ens Arr%enat%eru elatius 1ro us iner is )actylis glo erata 'estuca !ratensis 'estuca valesiaca (oliu !erenne 2oa !ratensis 3oeleria acrant%a Poaceae 4oronilla varia (at%yrus tu#erosus (otus corniculatus Medicago falcata Medicago lu!ulina 5nonis arvensis 5no#ryc%is viciifolia 6rifoliu ca !estre 6rifoliu !ratense 6rifoliu re!ens 6rifoliu ontanu 6rigonella coerulea Vicia cracca Vicia sativa Fabaceae A7uga genevensis Agri onia eu!atoria Ac%illea illefoliu Alliu rotundu 4ardaria dra#a 4are8 distans 4are8 %irta 4are8 !raeco8 4onvolvulus arvensis 4entaurea 7acea 4erastiu glo eratu 4%aero!%yllu #ul#osu 4yc%oriu inty#us 4uscuta trifolii 4re!is #iennis 4re!is setosa )aucus carota )iant%us caryo!%yllus 9ryngiu ca !estris 9u!%or#ia agraria 'ragaria viridis 'ili!endula vulgaris :aliu veru S"($i(7 V1 # #! #3 ! #A.3 , ,# ! 69.5 !.3 # !.3 # ! !.3 # !.3 , , ! !.3 !.3 # $$ !.3 !.3 # ! ! ! !.3 !.3 ! 3 !.3 !.3 ! ! ! !.3 ! ! ! ! ! !.3 V1 V! ,! #> ! #! ,.3 #, ! 6 .5 ! ! ! , # !.3 !.3 ! #, ! ! ! ! # $! ! !.3 , !.3 ! ! !.3 ! !.3 A ! !.3 ! !.3 ! !.3 ! ! ! !.3 !.3 ! VV5 # ! ! ,! # #@ !.3 ! ! !".5 ! ! # ! ! ! # ! ! ! # # $$ ! ! ! !.3 ! ! # ! ! #, ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !.3 !.3 # V5 G&oun% $o#(& 849 V: V) V6 !.3 ! -! # @ ! ! ! #@ #B ,3 !.3 !.3 A B @ B ! 3.3 ! 3 , ,A ! ! ! !# 5$ ! ! !.3 !.3 ! ! ! # !.3 , ! ! ! ! !.3 # # ! !.3 !.3 ! !.3 # @ ! ! ! ! , # ! ! !.3 #.3 ! ! # !.3 $$ &6 $5 !.3 ! ! ! ! ! # ! , ! !.3 ! ! ! ! !.3 #.3 ! ! !.3 ! ! !.3 ! !.3 # ! > A , ! !.3 ! ! ! !.3 !.3 ! !.3 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !.3 !.3 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !.3 # !.3 # !.3 !.3 # , G&oun% $o#(& 849 V: V) V6 V, 3 B ! ,, #3 ! ,3 ! %" # ! !.3 !.3 ! # ! ! 3 ! ! ! !.3 # % ! !.3 !.3 ! !.3 ! ! !.3 .3 ! ! !.3 ! !.3 ! !.3 !.3 ! ! !.3 ! !.3 V, V; !.3 #! #!.3 #, !.3 #3 , 5%.5 ! ! ! ! !.3 ! !.3 ,# ! ! ! # # &! ! !.3 # ! ! ! ! ! # ! ! !.3 ! ! ! ! !.3 ! ! !.3 !.3 V< @ ! !.3 3 ! #@ A ,, !.3 6" ! !.3 ! @ ! ! ! ! # ! !.3 ! # # & ! !.3 , ! # ! ! ! ! ! ! !.3 ! ! ! ! !.3 # ! , !.3 ! V<

V;

;ieraciu #au%inii Myosotis icrant%a 2otentilla argentea 2otentilla recta Ranunculus !olyant%e os Ru e8 cris!us Salvia ne orosa 6ara8acu officinale 6rago!ogon !ratensis Veronica arvensis Veronica c%a aedrys Ot'(& botani$a! 1a i!i(7 G&oun% $o#(& 849 Ga"(7 849 Tota! 849 Nu b(& o1 7"($i(7 N(= 7"($i(7 Lo7t 7"($i(7

! ! ! !.3 , !.3 ! !.3 !.3 !.3 !.3 1;.) << 1 1** 5, * *

! ! ! !.3 # ! ! !.3 ! ! !.3 1;.) 1** * 1** -< ; 16

! # !.3 !.3 # ! # ! ! ! ! -1.) 1** * 1** -5 , -1

! ! ! ! !.3 ! ! ! ! ! ! 16 1** * 1** -6 ; 11

! ! # ! , ! ! ! # ! ! -5 1** * 1** -; 1* 1<

! ! !.3 !.3 !.3 ! ! ! !.3 ! ! 11 1** * 1** -6 ) 16

! ! ! ! !.3 ! ! ! ! ! ! 11** * 1** -6 , 16

! ! !.3 ! # ! ! ! ! ! ! 15 <;.) 1.) 1** -) ; -*

!.3 ! !.3 !.3 ! ! ! !.3 ! ! ! 1: <; 1** -6 11 -1

/n figure 0 is shown the coverage of main species of meadow plants most spread of the three groups. Thus, 'estuca valesiaca 9. is a relatively constant in all variants )@" #@?., )actylis glo erata 9. with a high

percentage of fertilization variants *>, *A ),-",3?. Arr%enat%eru elatius 9. with high share the variants * , *- ) !"-!?. and 2oa !ratensis 9. to variations *>, *A ),3" ,A?..

Figure ,. /nfluence of organic and mineral fertilization on the main species coverage in the vegetal canopy Among legumes, a higher proportion of Medicago falcata held a variant 9. *3, *B )-"@?. and species 6rifoliu !ratense 9. variant *B ,#?. <f different dominant species was 4entaurea 7acea 9. with "#,? share followed by Ac%illea illefoliu 9. with #" ? in *-, *@.

Figure . 6pecies evolution =egarding the evolution number of species )figure <., the results obtained from observations on vegetation are not encouraging if you were to look in terms of floristic diversity as the number of species that have entered the vegetation component CONCLUSIONS The obtained DM yields were influenced by climatic conditions, type and level of organic and mineral fertilization. The highest yields were obtained at the fertilization with ! t ha"# manure every years $ %)* + )* &,-. The obtained results have shown the positive effects of fertilization on productivity, floristic diversity and canopy structure of the studied permanent grassland. The permanent grasslands of 'estuca valesiaca 9. from =omania react very well to the fertilization, which may be an important measure of recovering permanent grasslands. From the obtained data we observed that, considering the climate conditions, the fertilization can induce relatively high productions, related to the applied fertilizers doses and types. is very low compared to the number of species that emerged off its composition. 'ut in terms of 0uality pasture and / refer to floristic composition, species have replaced worthless high value species.

A$>no=!(%2 (nt7 This work was published during the project ID<(T<=A9 6(;<<9 <F AJ=/(G9TG=1 A%D *1T1=/%A=K M1D/(/%1L, &<6D=GM(&&#!>MDM/#.3M6M>>,,,, co"financed by the 1uropean 6ocial Fund through the 6ectorial <perational &rogramme for the ;uman =esources Development ,!!>",!# . REFERENCES

# ,

3 A >

/&((" /ntergovernamental &anel on (limate (hange ,!!!. 6pecial =eport 1missions 6cenarios, /6'%DB,"B#AB"## "3. 6ala, <.1., (hapin, F.6., Armesto, N.N., 'erlow, 1., 'loomfield, N., Dirzo, =., ;uber" 6anwald, 1., ;uenneke, 9.F., Nackson, =.'., Einzig, A., 9eemans, =., 9odge, D.M., Mooney, ;.A., <esterheld, M., &off, %.9., 6ykes, M.T., Calker, '.;., Calker, M., Call, D.;., ,!!!. 'iodiversityOglobal biodiversity scenarios for the year ,#!!. 6cience ,@>, #>>!P#>>-. 6amuil (. et al., ,!#!. /mprovement of permanent grasslands in the %1 =omania. &roceeding of the #3st 6ymposium of the 1uropean Jrassland Federation, 'rno, pp , -" , >. Thomas, A. (ameron, =.1. Jreen, M. 'akkenes, 9.N. 'eaumont, K.(. (ollingham, '.F. 1rasmus, M.F. de 6i0ueira, A. Jrainger, 9. ;annah, 9. ;ughes, '. ;untley, A.6. van Naarsveld, J.F. Midgley, 9. Miles, M.A. <rtega";uerta, A.T. &eterson, <.9. &hillips, 6.1. Cilliams. ,!!-. 18tinction risk from climate change %ature, -,> pp. #-3P#-@. Tilman, D., Fargione, N.,Colff, '., DQantonio, (., Dobson, A., ;owarth, =., 6chindler, D., 6chlesinger, C.;., 6imberloff, D., 6wackhamer, D., ,!!#. Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change. 6cience ,B,, ,@#P,@*+ntu *., A9. Moisuc, J;. Motc4, /. =otar. ,!!-. (ultura paji7tilor 7i a plantelor furajere, 1ditura R/on /onescu de la 'rad S, /a7i 2danowicz Agata. ,!!3. 9and Abandonment, 'iodiversity and the (A&, 1d. 6ervice for 9and and Cater Management.