Integrating Winter Annual Forages into a No‐Till Corn Silage System

Faé, G. S.; Sulc, R. Mark; Barker, D. J.; Dick, Richard P.; Eastridge, M. L.; Lorenz, Nicola

doi:10.2134/agronj2009.0144

Cited by 61 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the same study, Franzluebbers and Stuedemann (2015) found that cumulative stocks of soil C and N fractions for the 0-to 30-cm depth did not differ with CC grazing after 7 yr. In Ohio, Fae et al (2009) found that grazing of annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum L.) and a mixture of cereal rye and oat managed under no-till corn silage system increased soil penetration resistance by 7-15% the 1st year but had no effect 1 yr later. The same study showed that grazing of CCs did not affect subsequent corn silage yield.…”

Section: Core Ideasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does cover crop grazing damage soils and reduce crop yields?

Blanco‐Canqui

Drewnoski

MacDonald

et al. 2020

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cover crop (CC) grazing can be a potential strategy to support livestock and crop production while enhancing soil ecosystem services, but research on this potential multi-functionality of CCs is limited. We assessed 3-yr cereal rye (Secale cereale L.) CC grazing impacts on soil compaction, structure, water infiltration, fertility, and crop yields on an on-farm irrigated strip-till continuous corn (Zea mays L.) silage experiment on a sandy loam with <1% slope in west-central Nebraska. Treatments were: (a) non-grazed CC, (b) grazed CC, and (c) no CC. Across the 3 yr, cattle grazed CCs at 5.9 AUM ha −1 with grazing occurring over a 4-mo period during winter and/or spring, depending on the year. We measured soil properties within 5 d after grazing ended in spring before tilling and planting corn. Cattle grazing resulted in a 92% decrease of CC biomass, compared with non-grazed CCs. Grazing did not affect soil penetration resistance (compaction parameter), bulk density, aggregate stability, pH, and concentration of organic matter and nutrients except in the 2nd yr where it reduced cumulative infiltration by 80% and increased penetration resistance from 1.23 to 1.72 MPa but such increase was below root growth thresholds (<2 MPa). Cover crop grazing had no negative effect on corn silage yields although data were variable. Overall, CC grazing for 3 yr had small and variable effects on soils and crop yields, indicating that it can be a management option to support livestock production but more long-term data from different tillage and cropping systems, and climates are needed to further understand CC grazing implications. 1 INTRODUCTION Cover crop (CC) grazing can be a potential strategy to support crop and livestock production, diversify agroecosystems, enhance soil ecosystem services, and improve over-Abbreviations: AUM, animal unit month; CC, cover crop. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Section: Core Ideasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does cover crop grazing damage soils and reduce crop yields?

Blanco‐Canqui

Drewnoski

MacDonald

et al. 2020

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Forage crops have been identified as important components of diversified intercropping systems, reducing irrigation water use [4], improving soil erosion protection [5], decreasing nutrient losses through leaching and runoff [6], increasing C sequestration [7], increasing weed suppression [8], and providing critical habitat for wildlife [9]. When forage crops are used within intercropping systems, the producers gain long-term environmental and soil quality benefits, while potentially achieving short-term economic value within their operations [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forage Warm-Season Legumes and Grasses Intercropped with Corn as an Alternative for Corn Silage Production

Nave¹,

Corbin²

2018

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intercropping of forage grasses and legumes can increase forage productivity and nutritive value; however, intercropping of corn with warm-season forages has not yet been studied in southeast U.S., thus requiring more information. The purpose of this study was to determine the yield and nutritive value potential of warm-season annual forages intercropped with corn (Zea mays L.) for silage production. Crabgrass [Digitaria sanguinalis (L.)] is considered a weed for corn production systems; however, our study shows that if crabgrass is interseeded with corn, it does not compete for resources and can maintain high corn yields. Forage mass for sunn hemp (Crotalaria juncea L.) was higher than that of cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] and crabgrass in 2016, due to a drought in spring and summer, giving sunn hemp a competitive advantage. Crude protein content was higher for cowpea as compared to crabgrass and sunn hemp, due to cowpea's ability to maintain its vegetative stage and high N-fixation, when compared to crabgrass and sunn hemp. Despite differences in the mass of the intercropped forages, the total herbage mass of the produced silage did not differ in 2016 and 2017. Intercropped forages can be harvested and ensiled with corn for silage production or can be left with the corn residue after harvesting to be grazed on in integrated crop-livestock systems.

show abstract

“…Additionally, reliance on a few forage crop species, such as corn silage, grown continuously may reduce yields due to weeds, pests, and diseases (Vencill et al, 2012;Gentry et al, 2013). Increasing forage yield by double cropping and improving year-to-year yield stability through crop rotation strategies using a variety of plant species that reduce pest, disease, and climatic risk may increase farm sustainability (Faé et al, 2009;Sindelar et al, 2016). Due to its high concentration of starch, matching the energy content of corn silage is difficult; therefore, variety selection (e.g., brown midrib; BMR) and harvest timing (e.g., boot or soft dough stage) are critical for alternative forage quality as plant OM digestibility can change rapidly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using brown midrib 6 dwarf forage sorghum silage and fall-grown oat silage in lactating dairy cow rations

Harper

Giallongo

et al. 2017

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Double cropping and increasing crop diversity could improve dairy farm economic and environmental sustainability. In this experiment, corn silage was partially replaced with 2 alternative forages, brown midrib-6 brachytic dwarf forage sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) or fall-grown oat (Avena sativa) silage, in the diet of lactating dairy cows. We investigated the effect on dry matter (DM) intake, milk yield (MY), milk components and fatty acid profile, apparent total-tract nutrient digestibility, N utilization, enteric methane emissions, and income over feed cost. We analyzed the in situ DM and neutral detergent fiber disappearance of the alternative forages versus corn silage and alfalfa haylage. Sorghum was grown in the summer and harvested in the milk stage. Oats were grown in the fall and harvested in the boot stage. Compared with corn silage, neutral detergent fiber and acid detergent fiber concentrations were higher in the alternative forages. Lignin content was highest for sorghum silage and similar for corn silage and oat silage. The alternative forages had less than 1% starch compared with the approximately 35% starch in the corn silage. Ruminal in situ DM effective degradability was similar, although statistically different, for corn silage and oat silage, but lower for sorghum silage. Diets with the alternative forages were fed in a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design experiment with three 28-d periods and 12 Holstein cows. The control diet contained 44% (DM basis) corn silage. In the other 2 diets, sorghum or oat silages were included at 10% of dietary DM, replacing corn silage. Sorghum silage inclusion decreased DM intake, MY, and milk protein content but increased milk fat and maintained energy-corrected MY similar to the control. Oat silage had no effect on DM intake, MY, or milk components compared to the control. The oat silage diet increased apparent total-tract digestibility of dietary nutrients, except starch, whereas the sorghum diet slightly decreased DM, organic matter, crude protein, and starch digestibility. Cows consuming the oat silage diet had higher milk urea N and urinary urea N concentrations. Milk N efficiency was decreased by the sorghum diet. Diet did not affect enteric methane or carbon dioxide emissions. This study shows that oat silage can partially replace corn silage at 10% of the diet DM with no effect on MY. Brown midrib sorghum silage harvested at the milk stage with <1% starch may decrease DM intake and MY in dairy cows.

show abstract

Integrating Winter Annual Forages into a No‐Till Corn Silage System

Cited by 61 publications

References 56 publications

Does cover crop grazing damage soils and reduce crop yields?

Does cover crop grazing damage soils and reduce crop yields?

Forage Warm-Season Legumes and Grasses Intercropped with Corn as an Alternative for Corn Silage Production

Using brown midrib 6 dwarf forage sorghum silage and fall-grown oat silage in lactating dairy cow rations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About