scholarly journals Forage Yield and Nutritive Value of Cool-Season and Warm-Season Forages for Grazing Organic Dairy Cattle

Agronomy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 1963
Author(s):  
Kathryn E. Ritz ◽  
Bradley J. Heins ◽  
Roger Moon ◽  
Craig Sheaffer ◽  
Sharon L. Weyers
Keyword(s):  
Nutritive Value ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Forage Yield ◽  
Perennial Grasses ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Organic Dairy ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
System 2 ◽  
System 1 ◽  
Warm Season Grasses

The objective of this study was to compare the forage nutritive value of cool-season perennial grasses and legumes with that of warm-season annual grasses grazed by organic dairy cows. Two pasture systems were analyzed across the grazing season at an organic dairy in Morris, Minnesota. Pasture system 1 included perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.), orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.), meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rehmann), meadow fescue (Schedonorus pratensis (Huds.) P. Beauv), alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), white clover (Trifolium repens L.), red clover (Trifolium pratense L.), and chicory (Cichorium intybus L.). Pasture system 2 was a combination of system 1 and monocultures of warm-season grasses (sorghum-sudangrass (Sorghum bicolor [L.] Moench subsp. drummondii [Steud.]) and teff (Eragrostis tef L.)). Across the grazing season, forage yield was 39% greater for system 2 than system 1 due to greater forage yield during the summer. Neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) were similar for cool-season and warm-season grasses. Warm-season grasses had greater forage yield during the summer months compared with cool-season grasses and legumes. The total tract NDF digestibility (TTNDFD) varied by month and year across the study for both pasture systems. Overall, weather may affect the forage nutritive value for both cool-season perennial grasses and legumes and warm-season annual grasses.

scholarly journals Milk Production, Body Weight, Body Condition Score, Activity, and Rumination of Organic Dairy Cattle Grazing Two Different Pasture Systems Incorporating Cool- and Warm-Season Forages

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 264
Author(s):  
Kathryn E. Ritz ◽  
Bradley J. Heins ◽  
Roger D. Moon ◽  
Craig C. Sheaffer ◽  
Sharon L. Weyers
Keyword(s):  
Body Weight ◽  
Milk Production ◽  
Body Condition Score ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Organic Dairy ◽  
Condition Score ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
System 2 ◽  
System 1

Organic dairy cows were used to evaluate the effect of two organic pasture production systems (temperate grass species and warm-season annual grasses and cool-season annuals compared with temperate grasses only) across two grazing seasons (May to October of 2014 and 2015) on milk production, milk components (fat, protein, milk urea nitrogen (MUN), somatic cell score (SCS)), body weight, body condition score (BCS), and activity and rumination (min/day). Cows were assigned to two pasture systems across the grazing season at an organic research dairy in Morris, Minnesota. Pasture System 1 was cool-season perennials (CSP) and Pasture System 2 was a combination of System 1 and warm-season grasses and cool-season annuals. System 1 and System 2 cows had similar milk production (14.7 and 14.8 kg d−1), fat percentage (3.92% vs. 3.80%), protein percentage (3.21% vs. 3.17%), MUN (12.5 and 11.5 mg dL−1), and SCS (4.05 and 4.07), respectively. Cows in System 1 had greater daily rumination (530 min/day) compared to cows in System 2 (470 min/day). In summary, warm-season annual grasses may be incorporated into grazing systems for pastured dairy cattle.

Herbicides for Postemergence Control of Annual Grass Weeds in Seedling Forage Grasses

Weed Science ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Peters ◽  
Russell S. Moomaw ◽  
Alex R. Martin
Keyword(s):  
Warm Season ◽  
Big Bluestem ◽  
Forage Grasses ◽  
Annual Grass ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Intermediate Wheatgrass ◽  
Green Foxtail ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Large Crabgrass ◽  
Warm Season Grasses

The control of three summer annual grass weeds with herbicides during establishment of forage grasses was studied near Concord and Mead, NE, in 1984, 1985, and 1986. Three cool-season forage grasses, intermediate wheatgrass, tall fescue, and smooth bromegrass, and two warm-season grasses, big bluestem and switchgrass, were included. The control of three major summer annual grasses, green foxtail, barnyardgrass, and large crabgrass, was excellent with fenoxaprop at 0.22 kg ai/ha. Slight to moderate injury to cool-season forage grasses and severe injury to warm-season grasses were evident. Sethoxydim at 0.22 kg ai/ha and haloxyfop at 0.11 kg ai/ha controlled green foxtail and large crabgrass, but not barnyardgrass. Sulfometuron-treated big bluestem and switchgrass plots had the best forage stand frequencies and yields and, at the rate used, sulfometuron satisfactorily controlled green foxtail but only marginally controlled barnyardgrass and large crabgrass.

Late summer forage yield, nutritive value, compatibility of warm- and cool-season grasses seeded with legumes in western Canada

2014 ◽  
Vol 94 (7) ◽  
pp. 1139-1148 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Biligetu ◽  
P. G. Jefferson ◽  
R. Muri ◽  
M. P. Schellenberg
Keyword(s):  
Binary Mixtures ◽  
Nutritive Value ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Late Summer ◽  
Western Canada ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Crested Wheatgrass ◽  
Western Wheatgrass ◽  
Meadow Bromegrass ◽  
Warm Season Grasses

Biligetu, B., Jefferson, P. G., Muri, R. and Schellenberg, M. P. 2014. Late summer forage yield, nutritive value, compatibility of warm-and cool-season grasses seeded with legumes in western Canada. Can. J. Plant Sci. 94: 1139–1148. In late summer and fall, quality and quantity of forage are important for weight gain by grazing animals in western Canada. The objective of this study was to evaluate forage nutritive value, dry matter (DM) yield, and compatibility of crested wheatgrass [Agropyron cristatum (L.) Gaertn.], meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rehm.), green needle grass [Nasella viridula (Trin.) Barkworth], northern wheatgrass [Elymus lanceolatus (Scribn. & J. G. Sm.) Gould], western wheatgrass [Pascopyrum smithii (Rydb.) Barkworth & D.R. Dewey], Russian wildrye [Psathyrostachys juncea (Fisch.) Nevski], big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii Vitman), or switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) in eight grass monocultures, and their binary mixtures with alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia Scop.), or cicer-milkvetch (Astragalus cicer L.) harvested once in August or September. A field study was conducted over a 7-yr period from 1998 to 2004 near Swift Current (lat. 50°25'N, long. 107°44'W, 824 m elev.), SK, Canada, using a randomized complete block design. Forage DM yield was similar between August and September harvests (P>0.05). Binary mixtures of alfalfa–grass produced highest (P<0.05) DM yield ranging from 2449 to 2758 kg ha−1. The monoculture of crested wheatgrass (2143 kg ha−1), sainfoin with crested wheatgrass (2061 kg ha−1), and cicer-milkvetch with green needle grass (1838 kg ha−1) or cicer-milkvetch with western wheatgrass (1861 kg ha−1) produced the second highest (P<0.05) DM yields in the ranking. The two warm-season grasses produced the lowest (P>0.05) DM yields over the 7-yr period. Monocultures of green needle grass or northern wheatgrass had the highest acid detergent fiber (ADF) and neutral detergent fiber (NDF), while warm-season grasses with legumes had the lowest. Alfalfa with western wheatgrass and alfalfa with Russian wildrye had the highest crude protein (CP) concentrations. Monocultures of meadow bromegrass, crested wheatgrass, green needle grass, or cicer-milkvetch with meadow bromegrass, and sainfoin with crested wheatgrass had the lowest CP concentrations. In vitro organic matter digestibility (IVOMD) was greater for mixtures than for the grass monocultures. Concentration of Ca and P was greater for warm-season grasses than cool-season grasses. Alfalfa with western wheatgrass was the best combination considering yield, quality, and compatibility for deferred grazing in late summer and fall in the semiarid prairies. Tested warm-season grasses are not recommended for seeding as binary mixtures with legumes for southwestern Saskatchewan.

scholarly journals Comparison of warm season and cool season forages for dairy grazing systems in continuous culture1

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn E Ruh ◽  
Bradley J Heins ◽  
Isaac J Salfer ◽  
Robert D Gardner ◽  
Marshall D Stern
Keyword(s):  
Continuous Culture ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Nutrient Digestibility ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Total N ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Sorghum Sudangrass ◽  
Organic Dairy Production ◽  
Warm Season Grasses

AbstractThe objective of this study was to compare warm-season annual grasses to cool-season perennial (CSP) grasses for ruminal nutrient digestibility and N metabolism in a dual-flow continuous culture fermentation system. Dietary treatments were 1) fresh alfalfa, 2) CSP grasses and legumes, 3) brown-midrib sorghum-sudangrass (BMRSS), and 4) teff grass from an organic dairy production system. Eight dual-flow continuous culture fermenters were used during two consecutive 10-d periods consisting of 7 d for stabilization followed by 3 d of sampling. Fermenter samples were collected on days 8, 9, and 10 for analysis of pH, NH3-N, and VFA. Apparent DM, OM, NDF, and ADF digestibility were on average lesser (P &lt; 0.05) in CSP grasses and legumes and warm-season annual grasses compared with alfalfa. True DM and OM digestibility were lesser (P &lt; 0.05) for CSP grasses and legumes and warm-season annual grasses compared with fresh alfalfa. Total VFA were not affected (P &gt; 0.05) by forage. The NH3-N concentrations were highest (P &lt; 0.05) with alfalfa compared with the other CSP grasses and legumes and warm-season annual grasses. CP digestibility was not affected (P &gt; 0.05) by forage treatment. Flow of NH3-N was greatest (P &lt; 0.05) for alfalfa, reflecting the greatest NH3-N concentration. Flow of total N was greatest (P &lt; 0.05) for alfalfa, intermediate for teff, and lowest for CSP grasses and legumes and BMRSS. Flows of bacterial N, efficiency of bacterial N, non-NH3-N, and dietary N were not affected (P &gt; 0.05) by forage source. Overall, fermentation of warm-season grasses was similar to the cool-season grasses and legumes which indicate dairy producers may use warm-season grasses without concerns about negative impact on rumen health.

Seasonal and temperature effects on mycorrhizal activity and dependence of cool- and warm-season tallgrass prairie grasses

1992 ◽  
Vol 70 (8) ◽  
pp. 1596-1602 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. P. Bentivenga ◽  
B. A. D. Hetrick
Keyword(s):  
Tallgrass Prairie ◽  
Mycorrhizal Fungi ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Growing Season ◽  
Cool Temperature ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Fungal Activity ◽  
Prairie Grasses ◽  
Vesicular Arbuscular ◽  
Warm Season Grasses

Previous research on North American tallgrass prairie grasses has shown that warm-season grasses rely heavily on vesicular–arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis, while cool-season grasses are less dependent on the symbiosis (i.e., receive less benefit). This led to the hypothesis that cool-season grasses are less dependent on the symbiosis, because the growth of these plants occurs when mycorrhizal fungi are inactive. Field studies were performed to assess the effect of phenology of cool- and warm-season grasses on mycorrhizal fungal activity and fungal species composition. Mycorrhizal fungal activity in field samples was assessed using the vital stain nitro blue tetrazolium in addition to traditional staining techniques. Mycorrhizal activity was greater in cool-season grasses than in warm-season grasses early (April and May) and late (December) in the growing season, while mycorrhizal activity in roots of the warm-season grasses was greater (compared with cool-season grasses) in midseason (July and August). Active mycorrhizal colonization was relatively high in both groups of grasses late in the growing season, suggesting that mycorrhizal fungi may proliferate internally or may be parasitic at this time. Total Glomales sporulation was generally greater in the rhizosphere of cool-season grasses in June and in the rhizosphere of the warm-season grasses in October. A growth chamber experiment was conducted to examine the effect of temperature on mycorrhizal dependence of cool- and warm-season grasses. For both groups of grasses, mycorrhizal dependence was greatest at the temperature that favored growth of the host. The results suggest that mycorrhizal fungi are active in roots when cool-season grasses are growing and that cool-season grasses may receive benefit from the symbiosis under relatively cool temperature regimes. Key words: cool-season grasses, tallgrass prairie, vesicular–arbuscular mycorrhizae, warm-season grasses.

Yield, Yield Distribution, and Nutritive Value of Intensively Managed Warm-Season Annual Grasses

2001 ◽  
Vol 93 (6) ◽  
pp. 1257-1262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renato S. Fontaneli ◽  
Lynn E. Sollenberger ◽  
Charles R. Staples
Keyword(s):  
Nutritive Value ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Yield Distribution ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
Intensively Managed

scholarly journals 76 Evaluating Nitrogen Management Strategies to Improve Southern Bermudagrass Grazing Systems

2020 ◽  
Vol 98 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. 26-26
Author(s):  
Justin C Burt ◽  
Jennifer J Tucker ◽  
Lisa Baxter
Keyword(s):  
Nutritive Value ◽  
Cynodon Dactylon ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Stocking Density ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
The South ◽  
Forage Crops ◽  
University Of Georgia ◽  
Annual Grasses ◽  
The University

Abstract Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) is one of the most common perennial warm-season forage crops grown in the South. While prominent in the region bermudagrass management requires large amounts of fertility and forage quality is moderate at best. Incorporating a legume into bermudagrass pastures could serve as an alternative to the necessary applications of synthetic N, while also improving the nutritive value of the forage base. A two-year grazing evaluation was conducted from May-Sept. 2018 (Y1) and May-Aug. 2019 (Y2) at the University of Georgia Tifton Campus in Tifton, Georgia, to compare concurring production of alfalfa/bermudagrass mixed pastures (BGA) with bermudagrass monoculture pastures with (BGN) or without (BGZ) the application of synthetic nitrogen. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three treatments and two replications. All paddocks were evaluated pre and post grazing event for herbage availability, botanical composition, forage species competitiveness, and nutritive value. Paddocks (0.8-ha) were rotationally grazed using put and take management with stocker steers (Y1 BW=195.9±22.9 kg; Y2 BW=228.5±30.0 kg), two testers per treatment. Steers were weighed at initiation, conclusion, and on a 28–30 day interval for calculation of ADG and gain/ha. Statistical analysis was conducted using the PROC MIXED procedure of SAS. Despite significant drought in Y2, year did not affect total gain/ha, however treatment did (P = 0.04), such that BGA was highest (383.6±35.1 kg/ha), and BGN and BGZ were not different (261.2±35.1 kg/ha and 239.0±35.1 kg/ha, respectively). This is likely due to the lower stocking density and inclusion of high-quality volunteer annual grasses in BGZ treatments which allowed for selective grazing. These data suggest that rotationally grazing alfalfa/bermudagrass mixtures can result in a higher gain/ha, than bermudagrass pastures that are supplemented with or without synthetic N in the South.

scholarly journals Warm-season annual forages in forage-finishing beef systems: I. Forage yield and quality

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 911-926 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deidre D Harmon ◽  
Dennis W Hancock ◽  
Robert L Stewart ◽  
Jenna L Lacey ◽  
Robert W Mckee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pearl Millet ◽  
Nutritive Value ◽  
Pennisetum Glaucum ◽  
Block Design ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Forage Yield ◽  
Experimental Unit ◽  
Beef Production ◽  
Sorghum Sudangrass ◽  
Value Determination

Abstract The demand for a year-round supply of fresh, locally grown, forage-finished beef products has created a need for forage-finishing strategies during the summer months in the southeast. A 3-yr study was conducted to evaluate four warm-season annual forages in a southeastern forage-finishing beef production system. Treatments were four forage species and included brown-midrib sorghum × sudangrass (Sorghum bicolor var. bicolor*bicolor var. sudanense; BMR), sorghum × sudangrass (SS), pearl millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.; PM], or pearl millet planted with crabgrass [Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop.; PMCG]. Treatments were distributed in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. Pastures (0.81 ha, experimental unit) were assigned to one of four forage treatments, subdivided, and rotationally stocked with a variable stocking density. British-cross beef steers (n = 32; 3-yr average: 429 ± 22 kg) grazed for 70, 63, and 56 d in 2014, 2015, and 2016, respectively. Put-and-take animals were used to maintain a forage allowance of 116 kg forage dry matter /100 kg body weight. Forage mass was measured by clipping a 4.3-m2 area in triplicate on d 0 and on 14-d intervals. Hand grab samples for forage nutritive value determination and quadrat clippings for species compositions were measured on d 0 and on 34-d intervals until termination of the trial. Forage mass was lowest (P &lt; 0.01) for PMCG at the initiation of the grazing trial, whereas BMR was greater (P &lt; 0.01) than SS at wk 6. Total digestible nutrients in 2014 were greater for SS compared to BMR and PM at the middle harvest (P &lt; 0.01) and BMR, PM, and PMCG at the final harvest (P &lt; 0.01). At the middle and final harvests in both 2015 and 2016, PM and PMCG contained greater (P &lt; 0.01) concentrations of crude protein than SS. These results suggest that BMR, SS, PM, and PMCG may all be used in southeastern forage-finishing beef production systems, as long as the producer strategically accounts for the slight growth and nutritive value differences throughout the season.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document