Grazing lands in warm-temperate and subtropical North America have become less diverse. Pastures are typically grass monocultures, while rangelands are generally managed for the grass components. Overstocking, selective herbicides, fire exclusion and heavy rates of nitrogen fertilizer have contributed to near exclusion of native, warm-season legumes. The simplicity of managing grass monocultures, pasture production responses to nitrogen fertilizer and profitability of grass-only systems have limited interest in legume-based approaches. Changing economics and ecological concerns with ecosystem accumulation of industrial inputs contribute to an increasing interest in legumes. Unlike the development of temperate pasture legumes and recent research in the tropics, legumes tolerant of both freezing temperatures and hot weather have received less attention. Poor establishment, limited persistence and potential invasiveness limit currently available introduced species. Native, herbaceous, warm-season legume species occur throughout warm-temperate North America, but little attention has been directed to these plants as potential forage species. Some success with a few native legume species, primarily in the genus Desmanthus, suggests potential for expanded assessment of forage value of the many species available. Current assessments of native legumes, primarily for conservation purposes, provide an opportunity to expand evaluations of these species for pasture and rangeland potential while economics of livestock production and public interest in ecosystem health are supportive. Experiences with legumes of warm-temperate origin in North America, along with results with temperate and tropical pasture legumes globally, provide a starting point for future efforts at incorporating greater legume diversity in pastures and rangelands of subtropical and warm-temperate regions around the world.

No abstract

Mulato ir [Brachiaria spp.] is a warm-season grass with excellent nutritive value adapted fo tropical regions; however, its herbage production and persistence in subtropical locations is unknown. Grazing and clipping studies were conducted in 2008 and 2009 in Marianna and Gainesville, FL, respectively. The treatments for the grazing study were beef heifers {Bos spp.) grazing Mulato II, Tifleaf 3' pearl millet [Petinisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.], or 'Hayday' sorghumsudangrassgrass [Sorghum bicolor {L.) Moench] pastures on a continuous stocking rate. In 2008, there were no differences in herbage allowance (HA) (0.9 kg dry matter [DM] kg-'' live weight [LW]), average daily gain (ADG) (0.5 kg d ''), and gain per hectare (168 kg) among treatments. However, Mulato II had greater HA (2.0 vs. 0.7 kg DM kg-' LW) and ADG (0.78 vs. 0.41 kg d-^) than Tifleaf 3 and Hayday and similar gain per hectare (302 kg) in 2009. The treatments for the clipping study were Mulato II, evaluated as an annual and perennial, Tifton 85' bermudagrass {Cynodon spp.), Tifleaf 3 pearl millet, and Hayday sorghum-sudangrass. In 2008, Hayday and Tifleaf 3 established more rapidly than Mulato II; however. Mulato II grew later in the fall. In 2009, the perennial treatments (Mulato II and Tiffon 85) had overall greater herbage accumulation than the annual treatments. In the clipping study, Tifton 85 had greater ground cover than Mulato II perennial in 2009 (73 vs. 36%) and 2010 (73 vs. 12%). Mulato II may be used as a high quality, short-lived perennial warm-season grass in subtropical areas. ). Abbreviations: ADG, average daily gain; AU, animal units; CP, crude protein; DM, dry matter; HA, herbage allowance; HAR, herbage accumulation rate; HM, herbage mass; IVDOM, in vitro digestible organic matter; LW, live weight.G RASSES in the Brachiaria (Trin.) Griseb. genus are the most widely grown forages in tropical America, occupying over 80 million ha (Boddey et al., 2004). 'Mulato' was the first released hybrid in the Brachiaria genus and originated from crossing ruzigrass [Urochloa ruziziensis (R. Germ. & C. M. Evrard) Crins (syn. Brachiaria ruziziensis Germain and Evrard); clone 44-6] and palisadegrass {Urochloa hrizantha (Höchst, ex A. Rich.) R. D. Webster [syn. Brachiaria brizantha (A. Rich.) Stapfj; CIAT 6297}. Subsequently, 'Mulato II' was released because it had greater seed production and similar forage production and nutritive value as Mulato. Mulato II is the result of three generations of crosses and screening conducted by the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) in Cali, Colombia, including original crosses between ruzigrass x signalgrass [Urochloa decumhens (Stapf) R. D. Webster] (cv. Basilisk; apomictic tetraploid) (Argel et al., 2007). Mulato II is apomictic and a vigorous, semierect grass. Plant height, without the inflorescence, ranges from 90 to 100 cm and the plant architecture is characterized by 9 to 10 leaves per stem, arranged horizontally, to form a dense, leafy plant canopy. .

No abstract

The current reality of population growth, resource scarcity, and climate change requires resilient agroecosystems to sustain food production and protect the environment. This manuscript reflects a combined effort of speakers at the 2017 C6 Forage and Grazinglands Division Symposium, which was titled “Resiliency in Forage and Grazinglands.” The symposium brought together speakers representing a diverse cross‐section of forage systems across the United States. Each speaker discussed resilience‐related topics from their specific region, including: the importance of diversity and use of complementary forages in grazing systems, how grazing and defoliation affect resilience, the importance of soil fertility and pest management, and development of decision aids to evaluate resilience in grazinglands. Several themes emerged that we propose would help improve the resilience of forage and grazingland systems: (i) identifying moderately diverse, site‐specific mixtures (grasses–legumes) for use in specific regions of the United States, (ii) greater use of complementary forage species such as C3 and C4 grasses to lengthen the grazing season and provide a buffer against weather variation, (iii) adoption of moderate defoliation intensities to help stabilize forage production and species composition, (iv) more attention to maintaining and improving soil fertility to improve the productivity of desirable forage species and reduce weed pressure, and (v) increase adoption of assessment tools to evaluate the relative “health” and potential resilience of forage‐livestock systems. An integrative management approach that combines many of these elements would help improve the resilience of forage and grazinglands to sustain high productivity under increasingly erratic and extreme weather.