What question did this study set out to answer?

The aim was to assess the biomass production and nutritional value of grasses and legumes grown under different photovoltaic configurations for grazing dairy cattle.

April 12, 2026JDS Communications0 citationsOpen Access

Agrivoltaic arrays and effects of forage biomass and nutritive value of grasses and legumes for grazing dairy cattle

SFSabrina FlorentinoUniversity of Minnesota EBEric BuchananUniversity of Minnesota MRMichael H. ReeseUniversity of Minnesota

Key Points

The aim was to assess the biomass production and nutritional value of grasses and legumes grown under different photovoltaic configurations for grazing dairy cattle.
Conducted in 2022 and 2023 at the University of Minnesota, with 4 replicates per site.
Forages planted under 30-kW, 50-kW photovoltaic systems, and a control pasture.
Samples clipped at recommended pregrazing height for analysis of nutritive value.
Analyzed forage biomass and nutrient values using SAS PROC Mixed considering site and year effects.
Forage biomass was significantly lower at the 50-kW site (3,223 kg/ha) compared to the 30-kW (8,968 kg/ha) and control pasture (9,987 kg/ha).
The 50-kW site showed higher crude protein content (23.8%) than the 30-kW (20.1%) and control pasture (18.2%).
Total-tract neutral detergent fiber digestibility was highest in the 50-kW forages (54.4%) compared to 30-kW (52.3%) and control pasture (49.1%).

Abstract

Forage crops for grazing dairy cattle grown underneath ground-mounted photovoltaic systems (PV) may provide a feed source for livestock production.The objective was to evaluate forage biomass and nutritive value of grasses and legumes grown under different PV conditions.Forages were planted underneath a 30-kW PV site (30kW), a 50-kW PV site (50kW) and one control pasture site without PV (CON) in 2022 and 2023 with 4 replicates per site.Solar sites were all located on the University of Minnesota West Central Research and Outreach Center grazing dairy farm and were not located next to each other but were 700m apart.Forage crops included alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), field peas (Pisum sativum L.), meadow fescue (Schedonorus pratensis (Huds.)P. Beauv), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.), red clover (Trifolium pratense L.), brown midrib sorghum-sudan grass (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench ssp.Drummondii Steud.),white clover (Trifolium repens L.), and 3 grass and legume mixes with either alfalfa, red clover, or white clover.Forage samples were clipped (3 clippings per year) when forages reached approximately 25 to 35 cm in height, which corresponded to recommended pregrazing height for lactating dairy cows.Samples were analyzed for forage nutritive value.Forage biomass, dry matter and nutritive values were analyzed with PROC Mixed of SAS with the fixed effects of site (30kW, 50kW, or pasture), forage nested within site, year (2022 and 2023) and cutting (1,2 or 3) and the random effect of replicate nested within site.Forages produced less biomass at the 50kW (3,223 kg/ha) solar sites compared with 30kW solar site (8,968 kg/ha) and the control pasture (9,987 kg/ha).The 50kW forages had greater crude protein on a dry matter basis (23.8%) than the 30kW (20.1%) and control pasture (18.2%).The 50kW (54.4%) forages also had greater total-tract neutral detergent fiber digestibility than the 30kW (52.3%) and control pasture (49.1%).Forage biomass and nutrient nutritive values varied based on the solar array design and amount of sun exposure.

Perguntar à IA

Bookmark

View Full Paper