Effect of plant spacing and cutting intensity on the morphology and productivity of forage cactus [Opuntia stricta (Haw.) Haw.]

References

• Alves CP, Jardim AMRF, Araújo Júnior GN, Souza LSB, Araújo GGL, Souza CAA, Salvador KRS, Leite RMC, Pinheiro AG, Silva TGF. 2022. How to enhance the agronomic performance of cactus-sorghum intercropped system: planting configurations, density and orientation. Industrial Crops and Products 184: 115059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.115059.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apollon W, Valera-Montero LL, Perales-Segovia C, Maldonado-Ruelas VA, Ortiz-Medina RA, Gómez-Leyva JF, Vázquez-Gutiérrez MA, Flores-Benítez S, Kamaraj S-K. 2022. Effect of ammonium nitrate on novel cactus pear genotypes aided by biobattery in a semi-arid ecosystem. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 49: 101730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101730.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbosa ML, Silva TGF, Zolnier S, Silva SMS, Ferreira WPM. 2018. Environmental variables influencing the expression of morphological characteristics in clones of the forage cactus. Revista Ciência Agronômica 49: 399–408. https://doi.org/10.5935/1806-6690.20180045.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavalcante LA. Santos GRDA, Silva LMD, Fagundes JL, Silva MAD. 2014. Respostas de genótipos de palma forrageira a diferentes densidades de cultivo. Pesquisa Agropecuária Tropical 44: 424–433. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1983-40632014000400010.
   Google Scholar
• Dubeux JCB Jr, dos Santos MVF, de Andrade Lira M, dos Santos DC, Farias I, Lima LE, Ferreira RLC. 2006. Productivity of Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Miller under different N and P fertilization and plant population in north-east Brazil. Journal of Arid Environments 67: 357–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2006.02.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edvan RL, Mota RRM, Dias-Silva TP, do Nascimento RR, de Sousa SV, da Silva AL, Araújo MJ, Araújo JS. 2020. Resilience of cactus pear genotypes in a tropical semi-arid region subject to climatic cultivation restriction. Scientific Reports 10: 10040. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-66972-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farias I, Lira MDA, Santos DCD, Tavares Filho JJ, Santos MVFD, Fernandes ADP, Santos VFD. 2000. Manejo de colheita e espaçamento da palma-forrageira, em consórcio com sorgo granífero, no agreste de Pernambuco. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 35: 341–347. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-204X2000000200013.
   Google Scholar
• Ferraz RLDS, Dantas Neto J, Costa PDS, Lima ASD, Silva PFD, Matos RMD, Melo ASD. 2020. Variations in soil water replacement levels promote changes in forage cactus mineral composition and biomass productivity. Revista Ambiente & Água 15: 1–17. https://doi.org/10.4136/ambi-agua.2537.
   Google Scholar
• Fonseca VA, Donato SL, Santos MRD, Oliveira CM, Kondo MK, Cotrim CE. 2022. Nutrients in ‘Gigante’ forage cactus pear under different saline water irrigation depths and planting densities. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental 26: 381–389. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v26n5p381-389.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hussain J, Khaliq T, Ahmad A, Akhter J, Asseng S. 2018. Wheat responses to climate change and its adaptations: a focus on arid and semiarid environment. International Journal of Environmental Research 12: 117–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-018-0074-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inglese P, Mondragon C, Nefzaoui A, Saenz C. 2017. Crop ecology, cultivation and uses of cactus pear. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
   Google Scholar
• INMET, Instituto Nacional de Meteorologia. 2019. BDMEP – Banco de Dados Meteorológicos para Ensino e Pesquisa. Available in: https://www.gov.br/agricultura/ptbr/assuntos/inmet?r=bdmep/bdmep [6 May 2022].
   Google Scholar
• Jardim AM, Silva TG, Souza LS, Souza MDS, Morais JE, Araújo Júnior, GDN. 2020. Multivariate analysis in the morpho-yield evaluation of forage cactus intercropped with sorghum. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental. 24: 756–761. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v24n11p756-761.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemos M, Ferreira-Neto M, Fernandes CS, Lima YB, Dias NDS, Medeiros JF, Raimundo Fernandes R, Silva Sá FV. 2021. The effect of domestic sewage effluent and planting density on growth and yield of prickly pear cactus in the semiarid region of Brazil. Journal of Arid Environments 185: 104372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2020.104372.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lima GFDC, Rego MMT, Dantas FDG, Lôbo RNB, Silva JGM, Aguiar EM. 2016. Morphological characteristics and forage productivity of irrigated cactus pear under different cutting intensities. Revista Caatinga 29: 481–488. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252016v29n226rc.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louw EL, Hoffman EW, Theron KI, Midgley SJ. 2015. E. Physiological and phenological responses of Protea ‘Pink Ice’ to elevated temperatures. South African Journal of Botany 99: 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2015.04.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahouachi M, Atti N, Hajji H. 2012. Use of spineless cactus (Opuntia ficus indica F. Inermis) for dairy goats and growing kids: Impacts on milk production, kid’s growth, and meat quality. Scientific World Journal 2012: 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1100/2012/321567.
   Google Scholar
• Matos LV, Donato SLR, Silva BL, Kondo MK, Lani JL. 2020. Structural characteristics and yield of ‘Gigante cactus pear in agroecosytems in the semi-arid region of Bahia, Brazil. Revista Caatinga 33: 1111–1123. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252020v33n426rc.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monteiro CCF, Melo AAM, Ferreira MA, Campos JMC, Souza RJS, Silva ETS, Andrade RPX, Silva EC. 2014. Replacement of wheat bran with spineless cactus (Opuntia ficus-indica Mill cv. Gigante) and urea in the diets of Holstein × Gyr heifers. Tropical Animal Health and Production 46:1149–1154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-014-0619-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niechayev NA, Pereira PN, Cushman JC. 2019. Understanding trait diversity associated with crassulacean acid metabolism (CAM). Current Opinion in Plant Biology 49: 74–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2019.06.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peixoto MJA, Carneiro MDS, Amorim DS, Edvan RL, Pereira ES, Costa MRGF. 2017. Características agronômicas e composição química da palma forrageira em função de diferentes sistemas de plantio. Archivos de Zootecnia 67: 35–39. https://doi.org/10.21071/az.v67i257.3489.
   Google Scholar
• Perazzo AF, Santos EM, Pinho RMA, Campos FS, Ramos JPDF, Aquino MMD, Silva TC, Bezerra HFC. 2013. Características agronômicas e eficiência do uso da chuva em cultivares de sorgo no semiárido. Ciência Rural 43: 1771–1776. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782013001000007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pereira JS, Cavalcante AB, Nogueira GHMSMF, Campos FS, Araújo GGL, Simões WL, Voltolini TV. 2020. Morphological and yield responses of spineless cactus Orelha de Elefante Mexicana under different cutting intensities. Revista Brasileira de Saúde e Produção Animal 21: e2121142020. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1519-99402121142020.
   Google Scholar
• Pereira JDS, Figueirêdo PI, Anjos JS, Campos F, Araujo GGL, Voltolini TV. 2021. Forage yield and structural responses of spineless cactus ‘orelha de elefante mexicana’ at different planting densities. Acta Scientiarum Agronomy 44: e53016. https://doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v44i1.53016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinheiro KM, Silva TGFD, Carvalho HFDS, Santos JEO, Morais JEFD, Zolnier S, Santos DC. 2014. Correlações do índice de área do cladódio com características morfogênicas e produtivas da palma forrageira. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 49: 939–947. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-204X2014001200004.
   Google Scholar
• Ramos FJP, Souza JTA, Santos EM, Pimenta FILHOEC, Ribeiro OL. 2017. Crescimento e produtividade de Nopalea cochenillifera em função de diferentes densidades de plantio em cultivo com e sem capina. Revista Electrónica de Veterinaria 18: 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Ramos FJP, Leite MLDMV, Oliveira Junior S, Nascimento JP, Santos EM. 2011. Crescimento vegetativo de Opuntia ficus-indica em diferentes espaçamentos de plantio. Revista Caatinga 24: 41–48.
   Google Scholar
• Ramos JPDF, Macêdo AJDS, Santos EM, Edvan RL, Sousa WHD, Perazzo AF, Silva AS, Cartaxo FQ. 2021. Forage yield and morphological traits of cactus pear genotypes. Acta Scientiarum Agronomia 43: e51214. https://doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v43i1.51214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rocha Filho RR, Santos DC, Véras ASC, Siqueira MCB, Novaes LP, Mora-Luna R, Monteiro CF, Ferreira MA. 2021. Can spineless forage cactus be the queen of forage crops in dryland areas? Journal of Arid Environments 186: 104426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2020.104426.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rocha RS, Voltolini TV, Gava CA. 2017. Características produtivas e estruturais de genótipos de palma forrageira irrigada em diferentes intervalos de corte. Archivos de Zootecnia 66: 365–373. doi: 10.21071/az.v66i255.2512
   Google Scholar
• Sales AT, Leite MLMV, Alves AQ, Ramos JDF, Nascimento JD. 2013. Crescimento vegetativo de palma forrageira em diferentes densidades de plantio no Curimatú Paraibano. Tecnologia & Ciência Agropecuária 7: 19–24.
   Google Scholar
• Santos DC, Silva MC, Dubeux Júnior JCB, Lira MA, Silva RM. 2013. Estratégias para uso de cactáceas em zonas semiáridas: novas cultivares e uso sustentável das espécies nativas. Revista Científica de Produção Animal 15: 111–121. https://doi.org/10.15528/2176-4158/rcpa.v15n2p111-121.
   Google Scholar
• Shruthilaya N, Rahod S, Rajanna N, Laxmi PJ, Ramana DBV. 2022. Effect of feeding cactus (Opuntia ficus) on growth performance of Nellore lambs. The Pharma Innovation Journal 11: 926–931.
   Google Scholar
• Silva ESD, Gomes IA, Melo LJD. Medeiros WPD, Medeiros MBD. 2020. Características da palma forrageira Opuntia spp. com potencial à resistência à cochonilha do carmim Dactylopius opuntiae (Cockerell) (Hemiptera: Dactylopiidae). Revista Brasileira de Gestão Ambiental e Sustentabilidade 7: 1533–1541. https://doi.org/10.21438/rbgas(2020)071731.
   Google Scholar
• Silva ETDS, Melo AASD, Ferreira MDA, Oliveira JCVD, Santos DCD, Silva RC, Inácio JG. 2017. Acceptability by Girolando heifers and nutritional value of erect prickly pear stored for different periods. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 52: 761-767. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-204x2017000900008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silva LM, Fagundes JL, Viegas PAA, Muniz EN, Rangel JHDA, Moreira AL, Backes AA. 2014a. Produtividade da palma forrageira cultivada em diferentes densidades de plantio. Ciência Rural 44: 2064–2071. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20131305.
   Google Scholar
• Silva TG, Primo JT, Silva SM, Moura MS, Santos DC, Silva MD, Araújo JE. 2014b. Indicadores de eficiência do uso da água e de nutrientes de clones de palma forrageira em condições de sequeiro no Semiárido brasileiro. Bragantia 73: 184–191. https://doi.org/10.1590/brag.2014.017.
   Google Scholar
• Silva TGP, Batista ÂMV, Guim A, de Assis Leite Souza F, de Carvalho FFR, da Silva Júnior VA, Arandas JKG, de Barros MEG, Sousa DR, da Silva SMC. 2021. Cactus cladodes cause intestinal damage, but improve sheep performance. Tropical Animal Health Production 53: 281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-021-02731-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souza JTA, da Silva Ribeiro JE, de Farias Ramos JP, Sousa WH, Araújo JS, Lima GFC, Dias JA. 2019. Rendimento quântico e eficiência de uso da água de genótipos de palma forrageira no Semiárido brasileiro. Archivos de Zootecnia 68: 268–273. https://doi.org/10.21071/az.v68i262.4146.
   Google Scholar