Annual warm-season grasses vary for forage yield, quality, and competitiveness with weeds

Lenssen, Andrew W.; Cash, S.D.

doi:10.1080/03650340.2010.498012

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Use of sorghum–sudangrass as a companion crop greatly increased total dry matter yield in the seeding year, which can be attributed directly to the growth of sorghum–sudangrass. These results thus align with others that have found sorghum–sudangrass to be a productive summer crop that could be used as both a forage (Lenssen & Cash, 2011) and a dedicated energy crop under limited water supplies (Staggenborg, 2016). Annual warm‐season grasses are frequently used during summer slump periods when growth of perennial pasture grasses slow to keep forage available throughout the growing season (Dillard et al., 2018).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Previous studies have found sorghum–sudangrass to effectively suppress weeds due to release of allelopathic compounds (Marchi, Marchi, Wang, & Mcgiffen, 2008; Weston, Harmon, & Mueller, 1989). It has also been shown to effectively reduce weed abundance and growth when utilized as a cover crop prior to the planting of a cash crop (Lenssen & Cash, 2011; Smith, Atwood, Pollnac, & Warren, 2015). The aim of this study was to determine the compatibility of sorghum–sudangrass as a companion crop with alfalfa.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Alfalfa establishment with sorghum–sudangrass as a companion crop

Vallie

Guretzky

Schacht

et al. 2020

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reduced first‐year yields and competition from weeds often limits alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) planting and establishment. This study was conducted to evaluate sorghum–sudangrass (Sorghum bicolor × S. bicolor var. sudanese) use as a companion crop for increased forage production and weed suppression during alfalfa establishment. In 2016 and 2017, alfalfa was drill seeded in the same row with a sorghum–sudangrass companion crop (SSGCC) treatment harvested either three (2016) or two (2017) times in a Lincoln, NE, experiment. Pairing effects were compared with non‐weeded control (NWC) and weeded control (WC) alfalfa monoculture seeding treatments. Total dry matter yields in the seeding year averaged 11.73 and 2.36 Mg ha−1 in the NWC and WC treatments, respectively. The SSGCC treatment, meanwhile, increased total dry matter yields to 26.37 Mg ha−1 while reducing weed yields by 63% relative to the NWC. The increase in total dry matter yield, though, came at a cost to seeding‐year alfalfa yields, which averaged 0.19 Mg ha−1 in the SSGCC treatment, compared with 0.56 and 2.29 Mg ha−1 in the NWC and WC treatments, respectively. In spring the year after seeding, alfalfa yields averaged 4.32, 8.05, and 3.68 Mg ha−1 in the NWC, WC, and SSGCC treatments indicating that seeding with sorghum–sudangrass could be an option to increase seeding‐year forage production and establish fair‐to‐moderately productive alfalfa stands in subsequent years. Alfalfa yields in the year after seeding, though, were greatest for the WC treatment indicating presence of benefits and tradeoffs of establishment with companion crops.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alfalfa establishment with sorghum–sudangrass as a companion crop

Vallie

Guretzky

Schacht

et al. 2020

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, fall‐seeded cereals may have different weed species and densities, resulting in greater competition from winter annual broadleaf weeds. Lenssen (2008, 2009) documented that broadleaf and grass weeds associated with herbicide‐free forage barley did not produce seed but herbicide‐free, warm‐season annual forages did have weed seed production (Lenssen and Cash, 2011). Annual barley forage is well documented as a successful, herbicide‐free crop in dryland systems because of its potential for high yield, good nutritive value, and WUE, and competitiveness with weeds (Harker et al, 2003; Lenssen, 2008, 2009).…”

Section: Previous Research On Annual Forages In Dryland Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forage Yield and Quality, Water Use, and Weeds of Selected Winter Cereals

Lenssen¹,

Cash

Carlstrom

2015

Crop Forage & Turfgrass Mgmt

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fall‐seeded cereals harvested as forage may be suitable rotation crops in the spring grain region of the northern Great Plains (NGP). A 3‐year field study was conducted to determine the biomass, forage quality, weed community, and water use dynamics of cereals grown for forage with or without post‐emergence broadleaf weed control. Fall‐seeded cereals were ‘Willow Creek’ awnletted winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), ‘Yellowstone’ awned winter wheat, and ‘Bobcat’ awnletted triticale (× Triticosecale Wittm.). ‘Hays’ hooded barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) was included as a spring‐planted control. Willow Creek had greater biomass yield than other fall‐seeded cereals, ranging from 4265 to 8435 lb/acre dry matter. Hays barley and Willow Creek had similar forage yield for 2 years, but Hays was the lowest yielding entry in 1 year. Water use (WU) and water use efficiency (WUE) were higher for Willow Creek than Yellowstone or Bobcat, while WU and WUE of Hays were intermediate to fall cereal entries. All entries had acceptable levels of crude protein and fiber for beef cattle maintenance diets. Willow Creek had the lowest crude protein concentration all three years despite harvesting entries at similar maturity. Weed biomass varied with cereal entry × year, but never exceeded 8% of total biomass for fall‐seeded cereals. In the absence of postemergence weed control, weed seed production was low with all entries. Fall‐seeded cereal forages are well adapted to the spring‐seeded cereal region of the semiarid NGP.

show abstract

“…Field pea and other pulse crops use less water than wheat and typically allow for additional available soil water for the subsequent crop due to their decreased rooting depth and earlier harvest compared with wheat (Miller et al, 2003). Annual forage crops, including cool‐season (Lenssen, 2008; Lenssen et al, 2010) and warm‐season species (Lenssen et al, 2010; Lenssen and Cash, 2011), also are highly water efficient. Sequencing cool‐season and warm‐season crops can improve weed management (Anderson, 2005); however, few warm‐season grain crops are well adapted to dryland conditions in the NGP.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Crop Diversification, Tillage, and Management System Influence Spring Wheat Yield and Water Use

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Depleted soil quality, decreased water availability, and increased weed competition constrain spring wheat production in the northern Great Plains. New management systems are necessary for improved crop productivity. The objective of our study was to compare productivity and soil water use of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in four crop rotations (continuous wheat, wheat-pea [Pisum sativum L.], wheat-forage barley [Hordeum vulgaris L.]-pea, and wheat-forage barley-corn [Zea mays L.]-pea) in two tillage (tilled and no-till) and management systems (conventional and ecological). Conventional management included recommended seed rates, early planting date, and broadcast N fertilization. Ecological management included variable seed rates, delayed planting, banded N fertilization, and increased stubble height. Spring wheat in diversified rotations averaged 35 mm greater preplant soil water content, 37 mm greater water use, 0.8 kg ha -1 mm -1 greater water use efficiency, and 473 kg ha -1 and 817 kg ha -1 greater grain and biomass yields than continuous wheat. Wheat in conventional management averaged 28 fewer heads m -2 , 4 additional seed head -1 , and 2 mg seed -1 heavier seed weight than wheat under ecological management, resulting in 644 kg ha -1 greater yield. Wheat under ecological management used 8 mm more water, but water use efficiency was 2.6 kg ha -1 mm -1 greater under conventional management. Postharvest soil water content was similar among rotations, tillage, and management systems, suggesting that wheat uses most available soil water. Spring wheat in diversified rotations planted early in the season is more resilient and should confer greater production stability than continuous wheat systems planted late.

show abstract

Annual warm-season grasses vary for forage yield, quality, and competitiveness with weeds

Cited by 14 publications

References 32 publications

Alfalfa establishment with sorghum–sudangrass as a companion crop

Alfalfa establishment with sorghum–sudangrass as a companion crop

Forage Yield and Quality, Water Use, and Weeds of Selected Winter Cereals

Crop Diversification, Tillage, and Management System Influence Spring Wheat Yield and Water Use

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About