Feeding sorghum ergot (Claviceps africana) to sows before farrowing inhibits milk production

Objective: To assess the impact of feeding different amounts of sorghum ergot to sows before farrowing. Design: Fifty-one pregnant sows from a continually farrowing piggery were sequentially inducted into the experiment each week in groups of four to seven, as they approached within 14 days of farrowing. Diets containing sorghum ergot sclerotia within the range of 0 (control) up to 1.5% w/w (1.5% ergot provided 7 mg alkaloids/kg, including 6 mg dihydroergosine/kg) were randomly allocated and individually fed to sows. Ergot concentrations were varied with each subsequent group until an acceptable level of tolerance was achieved. Diets with ergot were replaced with control diets after farrowing. Post-farrowing milk production was assessed by direct palpation and observation of udders, and by piglet responses and growth. Blood samples were taken from sows on three days each week, for prolactin estimation. Results: Three sows fed 1.5% ergot for 6 to 10 days preceding farrowing produced no milk, and 87% of their piglets died despite supplementary feeding of natural and artificial colostrums, milk replacer, and attempts to foster them onto normally lactating sows. Ergot inclusions of 0.6% to 1.2% caused lesser problems in milk release and neo-natal piglet mortality. Of 23 sows fed either 0.3% or 0.6% ergot, lactation of only two first-litter sows were affected. Ergot caused pronounced reductions in blood prolactin, and first-litter sows had lower plasma prolactin than multiparous sows, increasing their susceptibility to ergot. Conclusion: Sorghum ergot should not exceed 0.3% (1 mg alkaloid/kg) in diets of multiparous sows fed before farrowing, and should be limited to 0.1 % for primiparous sows, or avoided completely.

Seed production of Stylosanthes guyanensis. 1. Growth and development.

The pattern of growth and development of seed crops of stylo (Stylosanthes guyanensis) was derived from measurements made on experimental and commercial crops in north Queensland. The three cultivars Cook, Endeavour, and Schofield differed appreciably only in the timetable of their development. Each had distinct successive phases of vegetative and reproductive development culminating in total annual seed production of 700-800 kg ha-1 from a healthy closed canopy, the main recorded cause of reduced production being the disease Botrytis sp. In a healthy crop of Cook, the peak quantity of standing seed represented almost 90 per cent of the total accountable seed, and the rise to and decline from this peak proceeded at rates of the order of 3-4 per cent per day. It is deduced that, although there appears to be little potential for either increase in overall production or improvement in synchronization or retention characteristics beyond that currently attained by a closed canopy of healthy plants, there is scope for an increase in the efficiency of recovery of standing seed. Maximum recovery will be achieved through attention to choice of time of harvest, presentation of a minimum amount of extraneous vegetation to the harvester, and improvement in harvester separation.

Status assessment of water use research in turf growth and maintenance.

The strategic objectives of Turf Australia (formerly the Turf Producers Association (TPA)) relating to water use in turf are to: • Source and collate information to support the case for adequate access to water for the Turf production and maintenance sectors and • Compile information generated into a convincing communication package that can be readily used by the industry in its advocacy programs (to government, regulators, media etc) More specifically, the turfgrass industry needs unbiased scientific evidence of the value of healthy grass in our environment. It needs to promote the use of adequate water even during drought periods to maintain quality turfgrass, which provides many benefits to the broader community including cooling the environment, saving energy and encouraging healthy lifestyles. The many environmental, social and health benefits of living turfgrass have been the subject of numerous investigations beyond the scope of this review. However further research is needed to fully understand the economic returns achievable by the judicious use of water for the maintenance of healthy turfgrass. Consumer education, backed by scientific evidence will highlight the “false economy” in allowing turfgrass to wither and die during conditions which require high level water restrictions. This report presents a review of the literature pertaining to research in the field of turf water use. The purpose of the review was to better understand the scope and nature of existing research results on turf water relations so that knowledge gaps could be identified in achieving the above strategic objectives of the TPA. Research to date has been found to be insufficient to compile a convincing communication package as described. However, identified knowledge gaps can now be addressed through targeted research. Information derived from targeted research will provide valuable material for education of the end user of turfgrass. Recommendations have been developed, based on the results of this desktop review. It was determined that future research in the field of turf irrigation needs to focus on a number of key factors which directly or indirectly affect the relationship between turfgrass and water use. These factors are: • Climate • Cultivar • Quality • Site use requirements • Establishment and management The overarching recommendation is to develop a strategic plan for turfgrass water relations research based around the five determinants of turf water use listed above. This plan should ensure research under these five categories is integrated into a holistic approach by which the consumer can be guided in species and/or cultivar choices as well as best management practices with respect to turfgrass water relations. Worsening drought cycles and limited supply of water for irrigation were the key factors driving every research project reviewed in this report. Subsidence of the most recent (or current) drought conditions in Australia should not be viewed by the turf industry as a reason to withdraw support or funding for research in this area. Drought conditions, limited domestic water availability and urban water restrictions will return in Australia albeit in 5, 10 or 20 years time and the turf industry has an opportunity to prepare for that time.