Biomass yield and feeding value of rye, triticale, and wheat straw produced under a dual-purpose management system

Abstract

Dual-purpose management of winter cereals for grazing and grain production provides highly nutritive forage for ruminants in the spring and may positively affect straw feeding value. A 2-yr study investigated the effect of spring defoliation of triticale, wheat, and rye at the tillering and stem elongation stages on total biomass, grain yields, and straw quality. Furthermore, straws of spring-defoliated and undefoliated (control) cereal crops were evaluated for nutritional value and voluntary intake as a means of assessing the efficiency of dual-purpose management systems from the winter feeding context as well. The feeding study consisted of 9 total mixed rations (TMR), each containing 35% triticale, rye, or wheat straw obtained under 3 spring-defoliation regimens. The TMR were individually fed to fifty-four 1-yr-old Anatolian Merino ewes for 28 d. Defoliation of the crops at tillering did not affect the total biomass production or grain yields. However, biomass and grain yields were reduced ( < 0.01) by 55 and 52%, respectively, in crops defoliated at stem elongation. Straw of spring-defoliated cereals had less NDF and ADF concentrations ( < 0.01) but greater CP ( < 0.01), nonfiber carbohydrates ( < 0.01), and ME concentrations ( < 0.01) compared with straw from undefoliated crops. The increase in the nutritive value of straw led to greater nutrient digestion ( < 0.01) and intake of DM and OM of ewes ( < 0.01). However, sheep live weight gain did not differ among treatments ( > 0.77). This study indicated that straw feeding value and digestibility can be increased through spring defoliation.

Interactions of Spring Cereal Genotypic Attributes and Recovery of Grain Yield After Defoliation

“…Hence, amongst genotypes with similar fast phenological development that are bred and grown primarily for grain yield attributes there seems to be little practical difference in their capacity to recover after defoliation. Other research has shown that longer-season winter cultivars developed for dual-purpose use are likely to provide greater grazing potential and have longer time to recover enough leaf area and biomass to achieve similar grain yields and hence cultivar selection may be more important (Carver et al, 2001;Thapa et al, 2010). Our research demonstrates that even in fast developing spring cultivars in warm growing environments, opportunistic removal of small amounts of biomass prior to stem elongation (GS31) can be achieved without significant reductions in grain yield.…”

“…Grazing cereal grain crops during their vegetative phase and then allowing the crop to recover to produce grain yield (dualpurpose crop) offers the potential to substantially increase productivity, profitability and flexibility on mixed crop-livestock farms (Dove and Kirkegaard, 2014). Dual-purpose crops have been used for many years and are widely adopted in southeastern Australia (Harrison et al, 2011a) and in the Great Plains of the United States (Cutler et al, 1949;Carver et al, 2001). Traditionally these systems have involved grazing slowerdeveloping winter cereals which have a significant vernalization requirement to generate a longer vegetative period for grazing, as well as an extended period for post-grazing recovery of crop biomass and grain yield.…”

“…Traditionally these systems have involved grazing slowerdeveloping winter cereals which have a significant vernalization requirement to generate a longer vegetative period for grazing, as well as an extended period for post-grazing recovery of crop biomass and grain yield. Consequently, the winter cultivars are developed to suit environments with early sowing opportunities and longer growing seasons with higher rainfall (Bell et al, 2015b) and breeding is focused on winter phenology, and resistance to disease resistance and weather damage (Carver et al, 2001;Hunt, 2017). In these regions, mixed farms obtain large benefits from the highly valuable forage for livestock production, and the additional revenue and income diversification provided by the grain production (Bell et al, 2015a).…”

Perennial rye as a grain crop in Alberta, Canada: Prospects and challenges

“…Perennial rye initially matured faster than its fall and spring counterparts but slowed considerably as the season progressed, eliminating the ability for an earlier grain harvest, a prospect that would have reduced the risk of an early season snowfall damaging yields, inducing lodging, and often even impeding harvest in western Canada. However, the rapid vegetative growth may allow for a forage harvest early in the season and not impede the perennial rye crops ability to regrow and produce a considerable grain harvest (Ates et al., 2017; Pugliese et al., 2019). Testing this hypothesis should be included in a future study, as a second biomass harvest for forage may improve the profitability of the perennial rye, but a mismatch in the timing of biomass harvest could unintentionally deplete root carbohydrate reserves and compromise successful regrowth of perennial rye (Ferraro & Oesterheld, 2002).…”

Non-fiber Carbohydrates in Forages and Their Influence on Beef Production Systems

“…Similarly, Jacobs et al (2009) reported varying rates of increase in metabolizable energy and WSC concentrations of oat and barley varieties at silage harvest following two spring grazings at the tillering and stem elongation stages in a dual purpose management system. Ates et al (2017) also reported that straw of spring-defoliated triticale, wheat and rye had less NDF and acid detergent fiber (ADF) but greater CP, NFC, and metabolizable energy concentrations than straw from undefoliated crops. However, Francia et al (2006) reported no substantial changes in the nutritive value of oat or barley regrowths in relation to spring defoliation or grazing management in the Mediterranean region.…”