Potential of annual forages in the Northern Great Plains

Meccage, Emily; Carr, Patrick M.; Bourgault, Maryse; McVay, Kent; Boss, Darrin L

doi:10.2134/cs2018.52.0101

Cited by 3 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cool‐season, small‐grain crops (e.g., barley and oat) are popular annual forages in the USNGP, as mentioned previously (Meccage et al., 2019). Warm‐season annuals also are grown for dryland forage, but not to the extent of cool‐season species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Previous research on annual forages in the USNGP did include quality data (Carr, Martin, Caton, & Poland, 1998; Chen, Westcott, Neill, Wichman, & Knox, 2004; Lenssen et al., 2010, 2015; Miller et al., 2018), but these studies were limited to cool‐season species (Carr et al., 1998; Chen et al., 2004; Lenssen et al., 2015; Miller et al., 2018) or included a single warm‐season species in comparisons (Lenssen et al., 2010). Moreover, these studies did not consider anti‐nutritional factors, even though high nitrate and prussic acid concentrations are a concern when growing warm‐season, annual forages in dryland regions (Meccage et al., 2019). Future research is needed which includes nutritional and anti‐nutritional factor analyses of the forage produced by warm‐ and cool‐season annual crops.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cool‐season species, in addition to pea, have been considered as a summer fallow replacement in rotations with wheat. Barley is a popular annual forage grown in the USNGP (Meccage, Carr, Bourgault, McVay, & Boss, 2019), and awnletted cultivars have been released for forage production (Hockett et al., 1990). Lenssen, Sainju, Jabro, Allen, and Evans (2015) reported that higher seeding rates (298 vs. 223 live kernels m −2 ) and banded nitrogen fertilizer application in a no‐tillage seedbed resulted in greater forage DM production compared to a conventional‐tillage system when planting at recommended seeding rates and broadcasting nitrogen fertilizer.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Warm‐season annual crops are grown for dryland forage in the USNGP, though not to the extent as are cool‐season annual crops (Meccage et al., 2019). Lenssen et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Warm‐season forage options in Northern Dryland Regions

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rotating summer fallow with wheat (Triticum spp.) is done in dryland grain farming at upper latitudes to stabilize yields over time and to prevent crop failure. However, summer fallow is costly since weeds must be controlled and crops are not grown. Replacing summer fallow with grain crops can generate low economic returns. Previous research indicated that annual cool-season forages can be substituted for summer fallow in dryland cropping systems. Our objective was to determine if annual warm-season species were suited for forage production in monocultures and polycultures in the U.S. northern Great Plains. Dry matter (DM) production by 20 warm-and cool-season crop monocultures and 4 polycultures was determined across six environments during 2016, and by 25 warm-and cool-season crop monocultures and polycultures across four environments from 2016 through 2018. Maize (Zea mays L.) monoculture produced forage DM in amounts equal to, or greater than, those produced by other warm-and cool-season crop treatments (P < 0.05). Maize DM production averaged 2.5 to 5.7 Mg ha −1 , depending on the study and environment. Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.), foxtail millet [Setaria italica (L.) P. Beauv.] and sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) also produced relatively large amounts of forage DM. Polycultures failed to produce more DM than monocultures consistently (P > 0.40). These results indicate that maize and other warm-season crops are adapted for dryland forage production in cool regions at upper latitudes. Additional research is needed to determine the impacts of annual warm-season forages on grain yield in a forage-wheat crop sequence.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Warm‐season annual crops are grown for dryland forage in the USNGP, though not to the extent as are cool‐season annual crops (Meccage et al., 2019). Lenssen et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Warm‐season forage options in Northern Dryland Regions

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Pea was included in more studies in Table 1 than any other annual cool‐season species, even though small‐grain crops (e.g., barley and oat) are grown more extensively for forage than annual legumes in the northern Great Plains (Meccage, Carr, Bourgault, McVay, & Boss, 2019). Pea forage yields ranged from <0.1 Mg ha −1 (Liebig et al., 2015) to almost 6 Mg ha −1 (Carr, Horsley & Poland, 2004) across studies in the region (Table 1).…”

Section: Regional Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Annual forage impacts on dryland wheat farming in the Great Plains

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wheat (Triticum spp.) dominates dryland grain crop production in the North American Great Plains and other regions with semi‐arid steppe climates. A common practice is to alternate winter or spring wheat with a 14‐ to 21‐mo fallow period to allow for soil‐water recharge, despite economic inefficiencies and environmental degradation. Replacing fallow with non‐cereal grain and seed crops often reduces future wheat yields due to increased water stress during grain fill. The use of annual forages may not have the disadvantages associated with grain and seed crops. The objective of this review was to determine benefits and challenges of incorporating annual forages into dryland wheat systems in semi‐arid steppe climates, using the Great Plains within the United States as a model system. Results indicate that: (a) cool‐ and warm‐season, annual grass and broadleaf species can be grown for forage across the region; (b) forage production will be less risky than grain and seed crop production under predicted climate‐change scenarios; (c) grazing annual forages may offer advantages (e.g., nutrient cycling, improved soil structure, added revenue from livestock) over mechanically harvesting annual forages; (d) the lack of infrastructure and local markets impede the use of annual forages to diversify wheat‐based cropping systems in the region; and (e) limited networking among researchers hinders the advancement in knowledge on how annual forages can be used to improve dryland wheat system resilience.

show abstract

Soil bacterial community response to cover crop introduction in a wheat-based dryland cropping system

Eberly

Bourgault²,

Dafo³

et al. 2022

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The incorporation of cover crops into cropping systems is important for enhancing soil health in agricultural systems. Soil microbes contribute to soil health by supplying key nutrients and providing protection against plant pests, diseases, and abiotic stress. While research has demonstrated the connection between cover crops and the soil microbiology, less is known regarding the impact of cover crops on the soil microbial community in semi-arid regions of the Northern Great Plains. Our objectives were to evaluate changes in the soil bacterial community composition and community networks in wheat grown after multi-species cover crops. Cover crops were compared to continuous cropping and crop/fallow systems and the effects of cover crop termination methods were also evaluated. Cover crops consisted of a cool season multispecies mix, mid-season multispecies mix, and a warm season multispecies mix, which were grown in rotation with winter wheat. A continuous cropping (wheat/barley) and wheat/fallow system were also included along with cover crop termination by grazing, herbicide application, and haying. Cover crop treatments and termination methods had no significant impact on microbial community alpha diversity. Cover crop termination methods also had no significant impact on microbial community beta diversity. Families belonging to the phyla Actinobacteria, Bacterioidota, and Proteobacteria were more abundant in the cool season cover crop treatment compared to the warm season cover crop treatment. Co-occurrence network analysis indicated that incorporation of cool season cover crops or mid-season mixes in a wheat-based cropping system led to greater complexity and connectivity within these microbial networks compared to the other treatments which suggests these communities may be more resilient to environmental disturbances.

show abstract

Potential of annual forages in the Northern Great Plains

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Warm‐season forage options in Northern Dryland Regions

Warm‐season forage options in Northern Dryland Regions

Annual forage impacts on dryland wheat farming in the Great Plains

Soil bacterial community response to cover crop introduction in a wheat-based dryland cropping system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About