Winter Cereal–Corn Double Crop Forage Production and Phosphorus Removal

Abstract

Maximizing P removal with cropping can increase regulated P‐based manuring rates or reduce soil test P in manure‐enriched soils. The potential for increased P removal with winter forage–corn silage double cropping was evaluated in a 3‐yr study at Parma, ID. Winter barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), and both winter and spring genotypes of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and triticale (×Triticosecale Wittmack) were fall planted at three seeding rates (112, 168, or 224 kg ha−1) and followed with silage corn (Zea mays L.). Corn alone and a noncropped treatment were included. Winter forages were harvested near boot stage. Seeding rates of 168 kg ha−1 were necessary for maximizing winter forage production but had little effect on P uptake. Winter forage production and P content were highly year dependent due largely to appreciable winterkill of spring wheat and winter barley in 1999. Winter forage P concentrations, unlike those for corn, decreased with successive harvests. Cumulative P uptake ranged as high as 65.7 kg ha−1 for winter triticale. Winter forages reduced corn yields in 2 of 3 yr and corn P uptake in 1 yr. Compared to corn alone, double cropping increased cumulative forage production from 8.4 to 15.9% and total P removal by 29.8 to 42.2%. Soil test P concentrations after 3 yr decreased more with double cropping than with corn alone. Half of the P decline was unrelated to P uptake and removal. Double cropping can increase total forage production, P removal, and hasten soil test P decline.

Double‐Cropping Sorghum for Biomass

“…The highest yields occurred at the 2007–2008 Sorenson site, partly because the harvest at this environment was delayed and resulted in a more mature triticale crop. While the yields at the Sorenson site during 2007–2008 and the 2008–2009 NW site are consistent with what has been reported in the literature (Brown, 2006; Harmoney and Thompson, 2005), it is not immediately clear why the 2008–2009 Sorenson site had such low yields. The lower yields may have been caused by an allelopathic response from the sorghum residue; however, there were additional subplots that experienced similar yields despite no sorghum being planted within them the previous year (data not shown).…”

Selecting Small-Grain Forages for the Southern High Plains

“…Growing the crops with the intent to sell to nearby dairies gives area farmers a potentially more profitable and less water consuming (12) alternative to grain harvest, depending on comparative crop market values. Small grains also serve as excellent cover crops that help prevent soil erosion and take up significant amounts of soil nitrogen (11) and phosphorus (3). Nitrogen uptake is particularly important in green water, land application practices common with dairies.…”

Using a Crop Growth Model to Quantify Regional Biogas Potentials: an Example of the Model Region Biberach (South-West Germany)

“…A similar effect was reported by Heggenstaller et al [29] from a field experiment comparing maize and a triticale/maize cropping systems with a 25 % higher dry matter yield for the triticale/maize cropping system than for maize only. Furthermore, Brown [30] also found higher dry matter yields in a cropping system consisting of triticale and maize compared to maize cultivated as monoculture. This will also allow for an enhanced and more efficient utilization of the available agricultural land.…”