Winter wheat fall–winter forage yield and grain yield response to planting date in a dual-purpose system

Epplin, Francis M.; Hossain, Ishrat; Krenzer, Eugene G.

doi:10.1016/s0308-521x(00)00004-4

Cited by 59 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This degree of grain yield loss is within the range reported for wheat and barley in dual-purpose systems elsewhere (Epplin et al, 2000;Virgona et al, 2006). Francia et al (2006) reported a 13.5% grain yield reduction for barley after forage removal in southern Italy.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Variable results have been reported about the impact of forage removal on the grain yield of cereals. In some cases, yield penalties have been reported (Epplin et al, 2000;Khalil et al, 2011). Virgona et al (2006) studied the eff ect of grazing by sheep during the late vegetative and early reproductive phases on wheat crops in two experiments.…”

Section: Crop Economics Production and Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nitrogen Fertilizer and Seeding Rate Influence on Grain and Forage Yield of Dual‐Purpose Barley

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clipping fall-sown cereals provides a good source of high-quality forage during late winter. Farmers usually use more inputs, including fertilizers and seed, in dual-purpose systems compared with grain-only systems. A 2-yr fi eld study was conducted in Karaj, Iran, to evaluate the eff ects of nitrogen (N) rates (0, 50, 100, 150 kg N ha -1 ) and seeding rates (400, 600, 800 seed m -2 ) on forage and grain yields of two barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivars (Fasih and CB 744) in grain-only and dual-purpose systems. Fasih and CB 744 grain yields in the grain-only system were 2996 and 3250 kg ha -1 , respectively (averaged over experimental treatments). Forage removal in the dual-purpose system resulted in 25% grain yield penalty. Despite the lower grain yield, the economic return of the dual-purpose system was considerably greater due to the high price of forage during late winter in the region. Grain yield response to N was linear in the grain-only system, but the trend was not signifi cant in the dual-purpose system. In both production systems, grain yield response to seeding rate was quadratic, and the highest yields of both cultivars (2534 and 3192 kg ha -1 for Fasih and CB 744, respectively) were obtained from 600 seed m -2 . In both production systems, 600 seed m -2 and 100 kg N ha -1 were optimum for grain and forage production. Our results showed considerably higher revenue in the dual-purpose system compared with the grain-only system in this region. Moreover, no additional inputs of N and seed are required for dual-purpose barley than those usually used in a grain-only system.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Crop Economics Production and Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nitrogen Fertilizer and Seeding Rate Influence on Grain and Forage Yield of Dual‐Purpose Barley

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Maximum forage production can be achieved by planting dual-purpose wheat earlier than grain-only wheat (Epplin et al, 2000). This early planting date gives producers an opportunity to graze their wheat fields before the first hollow stem growth stage (Krenzer, 2000), thus optimizing forage and grain yields.…”

Section: Dual-purpose Winter Wheatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hard Red Winter Wheat Cultivar Responses to a pH and Aluminum Concentration Gradient

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aluminum (Al) toxicity is a major yield‐limiting factor in winter wheat production in many parts of the world. The use of Al‐tolerant cultivars reduces the impact of this problem and is common to the southern Great Plains where wheat is managed as a dual‐purpose crop. However, no quantitative data exist on the Al tolerance ranking of winter wheat cultivars often grown in a dual‐purpose management system. This study was established to classify on a field scale the Al tolerance of common winter wheat cultivars (Ok101, Ok102, 2137, 2174, Jagger, Jagalene, Custer, and AP502CL). Fall forage yield of each cultivar was harvested by hand clipping. Soil samples were collected at the same time and analyzed for pH and Al saturation (Alsat). Grain was hand‐harvested in June of each year from the same rows harvested for forage. Cultivar differences (P < 0.1) were found in forage and grain yields for the Alsat > 30% range. Al tolerance based on grain yield ranked as follows: 2137 > Jagalene = Ok101 > Jagger = 2174 ≥ Ok102 > Custer = AP502CL. Al tolerance based on forage yield ranking was similar to that of grain: 2137 > Ok101 = Jagalene = Jagger > 2174 = Ok102 > Custer = AP502CL. Grain yield seemed to be less affected by Alsat than forage yields. The use of Al‐tolerant winter wheat cultivars may minimize producers' risk of crop loss; therefore, this ranking of Al tolerance should help winter wheat producers make informed decisions if they have acid soils with high Al content and no other remedies available.

show abstract

“…The majority of the acres planted to small grains in the SGP are typically established to wheat in early September to ensure that pasture is available for grazing by mid-November through the latter part of April [5]. Wheat is the typical variety of small grain established because it allows producers the option to produce pounds of gain on stocker cattle while also allowing them to produce a grain crop, provided cattle are removed from pasture before the development of the first hollow stem in late winter [6]. However, there are many producers who have land that is not well suited for growing grain who choose to establish small grain pasture for graze-only systems-systems that only produce pounds of beef without producing any grain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Feasibility of Using Switchgrass Pasture to Produce Beef Cattle Gain and Bioenergy Feedstock

Biermacher

Haque

Mosali³

et al. 2017

Bioenerg. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integration of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) into livestock production systems has potential to improve farm economics and encourage development of a biofuel industry in the Southern Great Plains. The objectives of this study were to determine the economics of seven alternative switchgrass grazing and bioenergy feedstock systems and to determine how sensitive the results are among the systems for a range of cattle and feedstock prices. Data were collected from a completely randomized designed grazing study in south-central Oklahoma in 2008, 2009, and 2010. Stocking density treatments [0, 2.5, 4.9 and 7.4 hd ha −1

show abstract

Winter wheat fall–winter forage yield and grain yield response to planting date in a dual-purpose system

Cited by 59 publications

References 8 publications

Nitrogen Fertilizer and Seeding Rate Influence on Grain and Forage Yield of Dual‐Purpose Barley

Nitrogen Fertilizer and Seeding Rate Influence on Grain and Forage Yield of Dual‐Purpose Barley

Hard Red Winter Wheat Cultivar Responses to a pH and Aluminum Concentration Gradient

Economic Feasibility of Using Switchgrass Pasture to Produce Beef Cattle Gain and Bioenergy Feedstock

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About