Agronomy Journal Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online 1 January 1990
Published in Agron J 82:164-166 (1990)
© 1990 American Society of Agronomy
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hall, M. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Hall, M. H.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Hall, M. H.

Influence of Sample Dividing Method on Forage Quality as Determined by Nirs

M. H. Hall*

Dep. of Plant, Soil and Entomological Science, Univ. Idaho, Moscow, ID 83843

* Corresponding author.

Forage samples collected in the field are normally dried, coarsely ground, and subdivided to minimize time and expense required for secondary grinding, facilitate ease of sample handling, and reduce space needed for sample storage. The objective of this research was to determine the efficacy of four sample dividing methods to produce uniform subsamples for near infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) analysis. Sample dividing methods were: (1) quarter sectioning with a straight edge, (2) use of a gravimetric dividing apparatus, (3) mixing in a blender then dividing by quarter sectioning, and (4) mixing in a blender and dividing with a gravimetric dividing apparatus. Dividing method efficacy was evaluated by comparison of subsample quality. Average coefficients of correlation (r) between subsamples obtained using the divider apparatus were 0.97 and 0.08 for crude protein (CP) and acid detergent fiber (ADF), respectively. These r values were 4 and 6% higher for CP and ADF, respectively, than those obtained using the quarter sectioning method. However, r of the quarter sectioning method averaged for both CP and ADF improved nearly 7% by mixing the sample before dividing. The gravimetric dividing apparatus was superior to the quarter sectioning method in uniformly dividing both mixed and unmixed forage samples.


Idaho Exp. Stn. Res. Paper no. 89-78.

Received for publication .





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Crop Science Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 1990 by the American Society of Agronomy.