Opuntia Spp. For Fodder and Forage Production: in Argentina: Experiences and Prospects
Opuntia Spp. For Fodder and Forage Production: in Argentina: Experiences and Prospects
INTRODUCTION
Cactus is extensively used as an emergency livestock feed during times of extreme droughts, i.e. a kind of
“drought insurance” (Le Houérou, 1994), in arid and semi-arid areas of the world (northeast Brazil, Mexico,
southern Africa, USA, and the Mediterranean Basin).
Cactus plantations in Argentina have increased from around 90 ha in 1993 to 840 ha in 1997. Most of
the plantations are located in the Provinces of Tucumán (39%), Catamarca (22%), Santiago del Estero
(14%), La Rioja (12%) and Salta (10%) (Ochoa de Cornelli, 1997). Among the main traditional, current and
potential uses of cactus (Barbera, 1995), the consumption of fruits, fresh or processed in syrup, is the most
important in Argentina (Ochoa de Cornelli, 1997). Most of the cactus producers use cactus as an activity
complementary to their agricultural systems. Cactus production is very popular in smallholder operations,
where the cladodes are used as forage for cattle and goats (Ricarte et al., 1998), although mainly in winter,
when the water supply for livestock is limited (Ochoa de Cornelli et al., 1992).
A few studies and experiences have been reported on cactus as fodder and forage in Argentina. The
ecological productivity and the nutrient content of the cladodes (Braun et al., 1979), the current status of
plantations (Ricarte et al., 1998) and their productivity under different management practices (Reynoso et
al., 1998) have been studied for Opuntia ficus-indica L. f. inermis (Web.) Le Houérou in Los Llanos of
La Rioja Province.
Our studies with Opuntia spp. began in the Mendoza plain at the end of 1995 in response to the
suggestions of Le Houérou (1995a). The experiments comprised effect of fertilizers, irrigation and planting
distances on the above-ground biomass production (experimental work still in progress at time of writing);
evaluation of plant survival and production in marginal lands (Guevara et al., 1997); micropropagation of
O. ellisiana, material with low availability of planting stock (Juárez and Passera, 1998); and cold hardiness
of Opuntia species and clones (in progress). At the same time, the economic feasibilities of cactus plantations
for cattle (Guevara et al., in press) and goat production (Guevara et al., 1999) have been assessed.
This chapter summarizes the studies and experiences in Argentina on opuntia for forage production
and its prospects.
Water stress
Sub-desertic zone: 0.06 < R/PET < 0.15 100 < R < 200 mm
Arid zone: 0.15 < R/PET < 0.33 200 < R < 400 mm
Semi-arid zone: 0.33 < R/PET < 0.50 400 < R < 600 mm
Winter thermal stress
R/PRT (%)
-5 < m <-3 Extremely cold winter
-3 < m <-1 Very cold winter
-1 < m < 1 Cold winter
1<m<3 Cool winter
3<m<5 Temperate winter
The weather stations were also classified according to the rainfall regimes: tropical (over 70% of
annual precipitation falling during the summer season); Mediterranean (over 70% of annual precipitation as
winter rains); and well balanced (between 40 and 60% of annual rainfall in winter).
The absolute minimum temperatures for most of the weather stations ranged from -5°C (La Rioja) to
-13.9°C (Chos Malal, Neuquén). The lowest temperatures recorded were -18°C (El Divisadero, Mendoza)
and -23.6°C (Malargüe, Mendoza).
R/PET (%) = 33
R/PET (%) = 15
50 20
41 12
21 32
16 40
40 1
19
39 29 Semiarid zone
17
30 22 36
37 38 23 25
15 4
24 18 2
30 28 14 6 31 7
20 26 33
27 35 9 34 13 Arid zone
5
3
10 8
11
10
Subdesertic zone
0
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
m ºC
Opuntia as forage 65
KEY TO SITES
2 Andalgalá
3 Tinogasta
4 Catamarca
5 Chilecito
6 La Rioja
7 Chepes
8 S.J.de Jachal
10 San Juan
11 Barreal
12 Villa Dolores
13 Mendoza
14 La Paz
15 El Divisadero
16 San Carlos
17 San Rafael
18 General Alvear
19 Malargüe
20 San Luis
21 Unión
22 Santa Isabel
23 Puelches
24 Chos Malal
25 Las Lajas
26 Cutral-Có
27 Cipoletti
28 Choele Choel
29 Río Colorado
30 Maquinchao
Rainfall
Cactus and other drought-tolerant and water-efficient fodder shrubs (DTFS) can survive under rainfall as
low as 50 mm in a particular year, but with neither growth nor production (Le Houérou, 1994). Mean
annual rainfall of 100-150 mm corresponds to the minimum required to successfully establish rainfed plantations
of DTFS (Le Houérou, 1994), provided soils are sandy and deep (Le Houérou, 1996a). These limits can be
applied in the Mediterranean Basin, and North and South America (Le Houérou, 1994). Thus, cactus
plantations are eliminated from the arid (R/PET < 0.03; R < 50 mm) and hyper-arid (0.03< R/PET < 0.06;
50 < R < 100 mm) regions of Argentina.
Land tenure
Land tenure often constitutes a paramount constraint. The establishment of shrub plantations requires
long-term planning, relatively heavy investments and therefore land tenure security that provides possible
returns for such heavy investments. Land tenure and the control of livestock movements are therefore
prerequisites for shrub development (Le Houérou, 1996b).
and weeds was kept under control (Le Houérou, 1996a). The low yield from El Divisadero cactus
plantation is probably due to its unweeded condition, as they produced 300% less biomass production
than weeded plots (Felker and Russell, 1988). On silty sand soils, productivity reached only 0.75 t DM/
ha/year at a site with rainfall slightly higher than 200 mm, i.e. a RUE factor of only 3.5.
Sources: (1) Braun et al., 1979. (2) Reynoso et al., 1998. (3) Present authors’ data. (4) n.a. = not available.
kilogram of liveweight gain (Le Houérou, 1989). Thus, the monetary values (US$ per tonne DM) were
95.4 (EP) and 66.3 (SM) for cactus and 102.2 (EP) and 59.4 (SM) for range forage production.
Information obtained through the establishment and monitoring of experimental cactus plantations in
the Mendoza plains was used to estimate the establishment cost (Figure 10). The values correspond to the
mean of the two shadow prices. This cost ranged from around US$ 1 490 (50-ha plantation; EP shadow
price) to US$ 850 (200-ha plantation; SM shadow price) in the CAC system, and from US$ 1 080 (50-ha
plantation; EP shadow price) to US$ 970 (200-ha plantation; SM shadow price) in the DB system.
Using 12% as the capital opportunity cost and the shadow price of meat, cactus production was
found to be feasible in DB systems with 300 mm rainfall on a 100 ha plantation and with 400 mm rainfall on
a 50 ha plantation; and in the CAC systems with 100-200 ha plantations and 400 mm rainfall (Figure 11).
Figure 11. Internal rates of return (IRRs) from cactus plantations in the Mendoza plains according to
plantation size, rainfall and management system (Source: Guevara et al., in press)
Opuntia as forage 69
The economic analysis did not take into account the secondary benefits mentioned by Le Houérou
(1994, 1996a), such as runoff and erosion control, climate buffering, increased land fertility, landscaping and
amenities, stabilization of animal production and reduction in the cattle water requirement. This resulted in
a very large underestimation of the economic impact of cactus plantations.
Without the incorporation of cactus plantations, the cow-calf operation size necessary to yield positive
returns in the Mendoza plains was estimated to be 37 500 ha (Guevara et al., 1996). If a 3-year cactus
production accumulation and a daily consumption of 36 kg of fresh cactus material per animal unit (AU)
were assumed, the cactus plantation required to feed all the cattle (1580 and 2270 AU in areas with 300 and
400 mm rainfall, respectively), for the entire year in this cow-calf model would be about 0.3% of the ranch
size. This cactus plantation would increase the current ranch investment by 7 to 10% (Guevara et al.,
1996).
If dependable rain (f 0.8) is considered, the additional kids per goat required to reach 12% IRR
would range from 0.21 to 0.29 for 200- and 50-goat herd size, respectively. Further research is needed to
establish, under field conditions, the actual additional amount of kids that might be obtained as a consequence
of supplementing goats with spineless cactus in the dry season.
Figure 12. Total costs of cactus plantation establishment and fence installation cost in the
Mendoza plains, for three annual rainfall probabilities (f) and four goat herd sizes
(Source: Guevara et al., 1999)
Figure 13. Annual additional amount of kids per goat required to reach 12% IRR in the
Mendoza plains according to annual rainfall probability and goat herd size
(Source: Guevara et al., 1999)
Opuntia as forage 71