Dr. Alvaro Sotomayor1, 1 Forest Engineer, M.Sc., Dr., INFOR Bio Bio Region, Chile, e.mail: asotomay@infor.cl

www.infor.clwww.infor.cl; ; www.agroforesteria.clwww.agroforesteria.cl

ENVIRONMENTAL AND BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND BIOLOGICAL INTERACTIONS ON PRODUCTIVITY INTERACTIONS ON PRODUCTIVITY

OF A SILVOPASTORAL SYSTEM WITH OF A SILVOPASTORAL SYSTEM WITH PINUS CONTORTAPINUS CONTORTA DOUG. EX. LOUD. DOUG. EX. LOUD.

IN THE AYSEN REGION OF CHILE.IN THE AYSEN REGION OF CHILE.

CHILE, A COUNTRY OF CONTRASTS

Concepción

N

S

Coyhaique

GENERAL INFORMATION OF AYSEN REGION, IN THE PATAGONIA OF CHILE: RESEARCH AREA

It is located between 43°38´ and 49°16´ of South latitude and from 71°06´ of west longitude to the Pacific Ocean

• Pp (mm): 900 -1.300 mm/year

•T° medium min: July de -0.7 ºC (peaks about -17 ºC),

• T° annual average: 8.7 ºC. ( 306 days grades, base 10°C)

•T° medium max: in January 18.7 ºC.

• Winds: average 40 km/hr in spring-summer (peaks of 80-100 km/hr

GENERAL OBJETIVE

• “To study the effect of trees of Pinus contorta plantation, under silvopastoral management, in the productivity of the pasture and livestock, and in changing climatic variables in their environment.”

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Name of Treatments

Descriptions of Treatments

Average distance of climate stations to nearest tree(m).

T1. Traditional silvopastoral system, with natural pasture, improved by fertilization.

Pasture covered by 357 trees ha-1, distributed homogeneously, pruned to 3,2 m.

2,5

T2. Strips silvopastoral Systems, with natural pasture, improved by fertilization.

Pasture covered by 400 trees ha-1, in strips of tree lines of plantations, 21 m apart each other, pruned to 3,2 m

10,5

T3. Livestock system, with natural pasture improved by fertilization.

Area of pasture without trees

Without trees

May, 2004 May, 2010

T1.Traditional Silvopastoral: 400 trees/ha,

pruned to 3,2 m.Stat. Design: 3

plots of 1.000 m2

T2. Strip Silvopastoral: 400 trees/ha,

pruned to 3,2 m.Stat. Design: 3

plots of 1.000 m2

T3.Livestock treatment,

without trees in the pasture

Modification of forest plantation

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

FOREST PARAMETERSPASTURE PRODUCTIONLIVESTOCK PRODUCTIONMICROCLIMATERELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PARAMETERS FOREST,

MICROCLIMETE AND PRODUCTION OF PASTURE AND LIVESTOCK

RESULTS

Results: FOREST PARAMETERS

Table 2. Results from 2004 to 2008 of total height (m), diameter at breast height (DBH), canopy cover (%) and basal area (BA) in silvopastoral treatments.

Year T1.Traditional Silvopastoral T2. Strip Silvopastoral

DBH (cm)

BA (m² haˉ¹)

H (m)

C.cover (%)

DBH (cm)

BA (m² haˉ¹)

H (m)

C.cover (%)

2004 12,9 4,8 6,0 14,5 13,0 5,4 5,6 24,2 2005 14,2 5,8 6,4 - 14,1 6,4 6,1 - 2006 16,0 7,3 6,8 21,7 15,6 8,3 6,5 27,1 2007 17,8 9,1 7,2 31,1 17,1 9,9 7,0 28,9 2008 19,1 10,3 7,6 32,2 18,0 11,0 7,5 30,7

*: Different letters indicate significant differences (p<= 0.05)

Results: Pasture Production

Table 3. Pasture Production, 2004-2005 to 2007-2008 season (kg DM ha-1). Treatment

Pasture production per season (kg MS ha-1)* 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008

T1.Traditional Silvopastoral 1485,7a 6109,7a 4153,2b 4330,9b

T2. Strip Silvopastoral 2684,9a 7181,6a 6394,5a 5359,7a

T3: Livestock management 2452,1a 3832,0b 3874,1b 3513,6b * Different letters indicate significant differences (p<= 0.05)

Table 4. Animal productivity per effective hectare of meadow by treatment, 2004-2005 to 2007-2008 seasons, San Gabriel property, Coyhaique, Chile.

Treatment

Live weight gain per effectively ha of pasture and season (kg ha-1)*

Total production 2004 a 2008

(kg ha-1) 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 T1.Trad. Silvopastoral 113,8a 238,6a 305,8a 158,9a 817,0 T2. Strip Silvopastoral 110,2a 255,7a 317,8a 172,3a 855,9 T3. Livestock management 95,8a 227,9a 348,4a 144,4a 816,5 * Different letters indicate significant differences (p <= 0.05)

Livestock Production from 2004 to 2008

CLIMATE PARAMETERS

• WIND

Figure 1. Average wind speed, January 2007 to June 2008, per treatment.

CLIMATE PARAMETERS

WIND: Average Maximum Wind Speed km/hr:

WITH PEAKS MORE WITH PEAKS MORE THAN 80 KM/HRTHAN 80 KM/HR

CLIMATE PARAMETERS

Figure 5. Average monthly temperature, years 2007-2008, per treatment.

Average Temperature

1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0 7,0 8,0 9,0

10,0 11,0 12,0 13,0 14,0

Oct-07 Nov-07 Dec-07 Jan-08 Feb-08 Mar-08 Apr-08 May-08 Jun-08 Month-year

T ºC

T3.Livestock T1.Sil.Tradit T2.Sil.Strip

Figure 6. Average relative humidity per month, years 2007-2008, per treatment.

Relative Humidity per treatment (HR%)

61,0

66,0

71,0

76,0

81,0

86,0

Jan- 07

Feb- 07

Mar- 07

Apr- 07

May- 07

Jun- 07

Jul-07 Ago- 07

Sep- 07

Oct- 07

Nov- 07

Dec-07 Jan- 08

Feb- 08

Mar- 08

Apr- 08

May- 08

Jun- 08

Month- year

T3.Livestock T1.Sil.Tradit T2.Sil.Strip

Figure 7. Average precipitation per month, January 2007 to June 2008, per treatment.

Precipitation per Treatment Month-Year

4,0

14,0

24,0

34,0

44,0

54,0

64,0

74,0

Jan- 07

Feb- 07

Mar- 07

Apr- 07

May- 07

Jun- 07

Jul- 07

Ago- 07

Sep- 07

Oct- 07

Nov- 07

Dec- 07

Jan- 08

Feb- 08

Mar- 08

Apr- 08

May- 08

Jun- 08

Month-year

mm

T3.Livestock T1.Sil.Tradit T2.Sil.Strip

TEMPERATURE – RELATIVE HUMIDITY-PRECIPITATION

ANALYSIS: RELASHIONSHIP BETWEEN PRODUCTIVITY PARAMETERS OF THE SYSTEM AND CLIMATE.

Regression T1.Traditional Silvopastoral Regression T2. Strip Silvopastoral Variable R² Variable R² kg DM ha-1 0,88 kg DM ha-1 0,69

Figure 9. Lineal regression C.cover (%) - DM (kg DM ha-1), silvopastoral treatments, seasons 2004 a 2008.

11,97 18,05 24,13 30,21 36,28 C.cover (%)

898,15

2172,11

3446,08

4720,05

5994,02

DM/ha

Traditional Treatment

23,57 25,65 27,73 29,80 31,88 C.cover (%)

2036,90

3535,08

5033,25

6531,42

8029,60 DM/ha

Strip Treatment

Crown cover of trees-Wind

Crown cover- Dry matter (DM)

¿WHAT IS THE KEY FACTOR TO MANAGE FOR ANIMAL PRODUCTION IN THE PATAGONIAN REGION OF CHILE?

IT APPEARS THAT MANAGING CROWN COVER OF TREES TO REDUCE WIND SPEED

Figure 10: Regression average wind velocity (km hr-1) - animal production (kg liveweight ha-1), season 2007-2008.

Regression wind-animal prod.

Variable R² Animal prod. kg ha-1 0,86

1,49 3,75 6,00 8,25 10,51 Wind

133,90

145,45

157,00

168,55

180,10

Prod Animal

Regression Wind - Animal Prod., Season 2007-2008

ANALYSIS: RELASHIONSHIP BETWEEN PRODUCTIVITY PARAMETERS AND CLIMATE

Livestock Production -Wind

Animal production model, using Amimal Prod = f (C.cover*wind) and; f (C.cover*wind*DM) interactions:

Table 9. Statisticians regression of animal production, depending on C.cover*wind. Variable R²

Animal Prod. (kg live weight ha-1) 0,92

Table 10. Statisticians regression of animal production, depending on C.cover * Wind * MS. Variable R²

Animal Prod. (kg live weight ha-1)

0,96

ANALYSIS: RELASHIONSHIP OF MORE THAN ONE VARIABLE BETWEEN PRODUCTIVITY PARAMETERS*CLIMATE*DM

THIS MEANS FOR PRODUCERS, THIS MEANS FOR PRODUCERS, IF THEY MAINTAIN A IF THEY MAINTAIN A GOOD QUALITY PASTURE, THE FACTOR THAT IT IS GOOD QUALITY PASTURE, THE FACTOR THAT IT IS

INFLUENCING LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION IS INFLUENCING LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION IS WINDWIND, THAT , THAT CAN CAN MANAGE WITH TREESMANAGE WITH TREES IN SILVOPASTORAL DESIGN IN SILVOPASTORAL DESIGN

CONCLUSIONS

• It can be concluded that the trees ordered in silvopastoral treatments modified some climatic parameters of the environment. For the purposes of this study, and related to two important aspects to this study, production of the pasture and livestock, the parameter most affected by trees was the wind.

• Silvopastoral treatments substantially reduced the average wind speed in relation to the control treatment (livestock), with a lower wind speed of more than 200%. Regarding Wind chill, values were between 22 and 26% higher for silvopastoral strips and traditional treatment,

• Silvopastoral treatments led to greater pasture production in the four seasons of production evaluated in relation to traditional livestock management system for that region, which is to have areas of pasture unprotected by trees. The factor that mostly influences the increase in productivity of pasture was the effect of the crown of trees that reduced wind speed by 200%.

• Animal production was also associated with the interaction of wind and tree crown cover.

• It is possible to recommend to livestock producers of the Aysen Region of Chile, using trees in silvopastoral system in order to increase production as well as to improve animal welfare.

THANKS

www.infor.clwww.infor.cl; ; www.agroforesteria.clwww.agroforesteria.cl

• Dr. Alvaro Sotomayor1

asotomay@infor.clasotomay@infor.cl