Intercropping legumes and intermediate wheatgrass increases forage yield, nutritive value, and profitability without reducing grain yields

Pinto, Priscila; Cartoni-Casamitjana, Stefania; Cureton, Colin; Stevens, Andrew W.; Stoltenberg, David E.; Zimbric, Joseph W.; Picasso, Valentín

doi:10.3389/fsufs.2022.977841

Cited by 4 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 55 publications

(90 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Avoiding the decline in IWG grain yield in subsequent harvest years remains a major challenge for this perennial crop. Previous research has explored fertilization, row spacing, intercropping, strategic soil disturbance, and postharvest management practices to maintain grain yields but the results are highly variable (Han et al, 2013;Bergquist et al, 2022;Law et al, 2020;Pinto et al, 2021Pinto et al, , 2022Crews et al, 2022).…”

Section: Seasonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in Minnesota, Hunter et al (2020b) reported forage mass of 1.0-2.4 Mg ha −1 in the spring, then 1.1-2.8 Mg ha −1 in the fall. Pinto et al (2022) reported ∼1.0 Mg ha −1 of fall forage in Wisconsin. Another Wisconsin study reported spring and fall forage mass approximately equal (1.4 Mg ha −1 ) with the spring relative forage quality values 50% greater than the fall (Favre et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Managing IWG as a dual‐use crop (grain and forage) could address challenges associated with grain production (Favre et al., 2019; Hunter et al., 2020b). These two sources of income may relieve the economic disparity between perennial grain and annual cereal systems (Bell et al., 2008; Law et al., 2022; Pinto et al., 2022; Watt, 1989). Harvesting summer forage, that is, immediately after grain harvest, represents the most opportune time to capture and use forage mass in a perennial grain system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pinto et al. (2022) reported ∼1.0 Mg ha −1 of fall forage in Wisconsin. Another Wisconsin study reported spring and fall forage mass approximately equal (1.4 Mg ha −1 ) with the spring relative forage quality values 50% greater than the fall (Favre et al., 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another Wisconsin study reported spring and fall forage mass approximately equal (1.4 Mg ha −1 ) with the spring relative forage quality values 50% greater than the fall (Favre et al., 2019). Both spring and fall forage have suitable nutritive value for lactating beef cows, dairy cows, and growing heifers (Favre et al., 2019; Pinto et al., 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Forage harvest management impacts “Kernza” intermediate wheatgrass productivity across North America

Culman,

Pinto,

Pugliese

et al. 2023

Agronomy Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intermediate wheatgrass [IWG, Thinopyrum intermedium (Host) Barkworth & D.R. Dewey, trade name Kernza] is a widely adapted, cool‐season forage grass, actively bred for perennial grain production. Most of IWG's net primary productivity is directed to nonreproductive structures, so dual‐use strategies to harvest both grain and forage represent a potentially viable pathway to increase its productivity and profitability. We conducted a 3‐year trial at nine diverse environments across North America to evaluate grain and forage yields and forage nutritive value of an early IWG breeding line under contrasting forage harvest managements. These included control (no forage harvest), summer forage harvest immediately after grain harvest, and summer forage harvest with spring or fall forage harvests. Across all sites, IWG grain yields averaged 745, 296, and 221 kg ha−1 for the first, second, and third years, respectively. Grain yields were influenced more by stand age than site. Summer forage mass after grain harvest averaged 6.0, 4.5, and 5.7 Mg ha−1 respectively for the first 3 years. Forage mass was less influenced by stand age, and more by site and forage harvest frequency. Fall forage harvest increased grain yields while spring forage harvests decreased grain yields and both treatments increased total relative feed nutritive values. Collectively, our results demonstrate that harvesting forage can improve both grain yield and forage nutritive values. Farmers growing IWG as a perennial grain can benefit from dual‐use management by harvesting both grain and forage.

show abstract

Section: Seasonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Forage harvest management impacts “Kernza” intermediate wheatgrass productivity across North America

Culman,

Pinto,

Pugliese

et al. 2023

Agronomy Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Effect of multi‐tactic weed management on weed suppression and yield in the establishment year of intermediate wheatgrass

Menalled,

Pelzer,

DiTommaso

et al. 2023

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intermediate wheatgrass [Thinopyrum intermedium (Host) Barkworth & Dewey] (IWG) is a new perennial grain crop that can be harvested for multiple years. However, IWG grows slower than annual grain crops and is relatively uncompetitive with weeds during its establishment. Using multiple weed management tactics is a foundational principle of ecological weed management that can lead to synergistic interactions between tactics. Red clover intercropping, cultivation, and mowing—applied in isolation and all possible combinations—were assessed in a field experiment conducted at two sites in the northeastern United States. No single tactic or combination of tactics suppressed weeds relative to an untreated control. Likewise, there were no synergistic interactions between weed management tactics, indicating that the multi‐tactic treatments did not reduce weed biomass more than expected from the performance of each single‐tactic treatment in isolation. The lack of weed suppression across treatments likely contributed to their null to negative effect on IWG yield. Additionally, the competition from intercropping and the crop damage from cultivation and mowing may have reduced weed suppression and yield benefits. Although more research is needed to improve weed management in establishment year IWG, the experimental and analytical approach used here provides a framework that can be applied in other systems for evaluating the effects of multi‐tactic weed management and testing for synergistic interactions.

show abstract

Synthetic auxin herbicides do not injure intermediate wheatgrass or affect grain yield

Shoenberger,

Jungers,

Law

et al. 2023

Weed Technol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intermediate wheatgrass (IWG) is a cool-season perennial grass developed as a dual-purpose grain and forage crop. One barrier to adopting this crop is a lack of information on the effects of herbicides on IWG for grain production. An experiment was conducted to evaluate herbicide effects on IWG grain yield, crop injury, and weed control over 2 yr (2019-2021) at sites in Wisconsin, Minnesota, New York, and North Dakota, USA. This evaluation included Group 4 broadleaf herbicides registered in wheat: 2,4-D amine, clopyralid, MCPA, and a mixture of clopyralid + MCPA. Each herbicide or mixture was applied at 1X and 2X the labeled wheat application rate to newly planted and established (1 to 5 yr old) IWG stands in the fall or spring. Applications were made during IWG tillering or jointing stages in the fall or during the jointing stage in the spring. Across site years, application timing, herbicide, and application rate showed no effect on IWG grain yield or plant injury. Broadleaf weed control ranged from 71 to 92% across herbicide treatments relative to the nontreated check at the WI site while weed control at the MN site was variable among treatments. At the NY site, herbicides were equally effective for broadleaf weed suppression, whereas weed pressure was very low at the ND site and treatments did not affect weed cover. The results show that newly planted and established stands of IWG are tolerant to the synthetic auxin herbicides 2,4-D amine, clopyralid, and MCPA when applied during tillering or jointing in the fall or during jointing in the spring. Synthetic auxins represent a potentially useful tool for weed control in IWG cropping systems, especially for problematic broadleaf weed species.

show abstract

Intercropping legumes and intermediate wheatgrass increases forage yield, nutritive value, and profitability without reducing grain yields

Cited by 4 publications

References 55 publications

Forage harvest management impacts “Kernza” intermediate wheatgrass productivity across North America

Forage harvest management impacts “Kernza” intermediate wheatgrass productivity across North America

Effect of multi‐tactic weed management on weed suppression and yield in the establishment year of intermediate wheatgrass

Synthetic auxin herbicides do not injure intermediate wheatgrass or affect grain yield

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About