Effects of Cutting Management on Yields, Digestibility, Crude Protein, and Persistence of Timothy, Bromegrass, and Orchard Grass

Self Cite

supporting

confidence: 83%

Influence of Harvest Systems and Nitrogen Rates on Yields, Quality and Persistence of Champ Timothy in the Seeding and Postseeding Years

Kunelius¹,

Suzuki²,

Winter³

1976

Self Cite

“…McKenzie et al (2004) concluded that harvesting birdsfoot trefoil more than once per year in Atlantic Canada significantly reduced stand density. Most studies have shown a limited impact of harvest management on timothy persistence (Kunelius et al 1974(Kunelius et al , 1976Kunelius and McRae 1986). Relative seasonal DM yield of alfalfa (DM yield with three harvests per year with the third harvest in the fall divided by the DM yield with only two harvests) in the first, second, or third production year of alfalfa harvested a third time in the fall at either 400 or 600 GDD after the second harvest, at six sites in eastern Canada.…”

Section: Cutting Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Winter damage to perennial forage crops in eastern Canada: Causes, mitigation, and prediction

Bélanger¹,

Castonguay²,

Bertrand³

et al. 2006

R. 2006. Winter damage to perennial forage crops in eastern Canada: Causes, mitigation, and prediction. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86: 33-47. Harsh winter climate results in frequent losses of stands and yield reduction in many forage-growing areas of Canada and other parts of the world. Climatic conditions and crop management both affect the winter survival of perennial forage crops. In this review, we present the main causes of winter damage in eastern Canada and we discuss crop management practices that help mitigate the risks of losses. Predictive tools available to assess the risks of winter damage both spatially and temporally are also presented. Our understanding of the causes of winter damage and of the plant adaptation mechanisms to winter stresses, particularly the role of N and C organic reserves, has improved. Forage species commonly grown in eastern Canada differ in their tolerance to subfreezing temperatures and to anoxia caused by the presence of ice on fields. Some improvement in winter hardiness of forage legume species has been achieved through breeding in eastern Canada but new technologies based on laboratory freezing tests and the identification of molecular markers may facilitate the future development of winter-hardy cultivars. Crop management practices required for good winter survival are now better defined, particularly those involving cutting management and the interval between harvests. Simulation models and climatic indices derived from our current knowledge of the causes of winter damage provide general indications on the risk of winter damage but their degree of precision and accuracy is still not satisfactory. Further improvements in winter survival require a more thorough understanding of the different causes of winter damage and, primarily, of their complex interactions with genetic, climatic, and management factors.

“…The increase in fiber and decline in quality have been previously described in cool season grasses. The in vitro digestibility of timothy, bromegrass and orchardgrass dry matter has been observed to decline between 9 June and 6 July by 0.69, 0.66 and 0.82% d -1 , respectively (Kunelius et al 1974). Averaged over five perennial grasses and three locations, for four harvest dates between early May and mid-June, neutral detergent fiber increased from 40.0 to 72.7%, indigestible fiber increased from 6.0 to 25.5%, lignin increased from 1.7 to 5.3%, and digestibility of fiber decreased from 79.9 to 44.2% (Cherney et al 1993).…”

Section: Experiments 1 Harvest Time Effects On Forage Yield and Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…also declined as the maturity advanced (Smith and Lutwick 1975). Kunelius et al (1974) reported a decline in PC at a rate of 3.4, 3.7 and 3.3 g kg -1 between 9 June and 6 July for timothy (Phleum pretense L.), smooth bromegrass and orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.), respectively. The forage quality showed a clear decline with delay in harvest date and need to be considered to decide the best time of harvest.…”

Section: Experiments 1 Harvest Time Effects On Forage Yield and Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Harvest time and N fertilization effects on forage yield and quality of quackgrass (Elytrigia repens L.) in northeastern Saskatchewan

Malhi¹,

Foster²,

Gill³

2003

Beauv.] is a primary noxious weed, but some cattle producers are discovering its value as forage for early-season grazing and for winter feeding as hay. Little information is available on how its production and quality change with advancing maturity and on its response to improved management in the Parkland zone of the Canadian prairies. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of harvest date and N fertilizer (surface-broadcast ammonium nitrate at 0, 56, 112 and 168 kg N ha -1 ) on the forage yield and quality of quackgrass. The study was done on a 10-yr-old quackgrass (≈ 90%) dominated stand on a silty clay loam (Dark Gray Luvisol) soil near Tisdale in northeastern Saskatchewan. For the harvest dates between early June and early September, maximum dry matter yield (DMY) was in August and maximum protein yield (PY) occurred in July. A delay in harvest reduced protein concentration (PC) and total digestible nutrients concentration (TDN), while it increased acid detergent fiber concentration (ADF). The DMY, PC and PY increased with increasing N rate for both Cut 1 (in early July) and Cut 2 (in late September). Strong quadratic relationships were observed between DMY and N rate. The effect of N application was relatively greater on PY than DMY due to the cumulative effect of increases in DMY and PC, and was greater in Cut 1 than in Cut 2. With the increase in N rate, TDN showed a trend of small increase, while ADF tended to decrease. In summary, the results show that N fertilization increases both forage yield and quality of quackgrass. Harvesting in late July or August is likely to provide maximum DMY when one harvest per season is taken. On sait néanmoins peu de choses sur la façon dont la production et la qualité du fourrage évoluent avec sa maturation et sur la réaction de cette espèce aux meilleures pratiques de culture dans la zone des prairies-parcs des Prairies canadiennes. L'étude devait préciser l'incidence du moment de la récolte et des engrais N (0, 56, 112 ou 168 kg de nitrate d'ammonium par hectare épandus à la volée) sur la qualité et le rendement fourragers du chiendent. Elle portait sur un peuplement de dix ans dominé par le chiendent (≈ 90 %) poussant en loam de limon argileux (luvisol gris foncé) près de Tisdale, dans le nord-est de la Saskatchewan. Lorsque la récolte s'effectue entre le début de juin et le début de septembre, le rendement maximum en matière sèche (RMS) survient en août et le rendement maximal en protéines (RP) en juillet. Un retard dans la récolte réduit la concentration de protéines (CP) et d'éléments nutritifs digestibles (END), mais accroît la concentration de fibres au détergent acide (FDA). Le RMS, la CP et le RP augmentent avec le taux d'application de N à la première coupe (début juillet) et à la seconde (fin septembre). Il existe de fortes relations quadratiques entre le RMS et le taux d'application de l'engrais azoté. Ce dernier agit relativement plus sur le RP que sur le RMS en raison de l'effet cumulatif du RMS et de la CP, et cela davantage à la prem...