Yield and Morphological Studies With Oats for Forage and Grain Production

Folkins, L. P.; Kaufmann, M. L.

doi:10.4141/cjps74-110

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Oat forage yield obtained during autumn was 40% greater than that reported by Maloney et al (1999) Maloney planted 1 wk later than in the current study, and this could account for his lower yields. Early summer oat forage yield was similar to those reported in other studies harvested at comparable maturity (Edmisten et al, 1998a; Folkins and Kaufmann, 1974; Stuthman and Marten, 1972; Cherney and Marten, 1982a).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Forage Production and Nutritive Value of Oat in Autumn and Early Summer

Contreras‐Govea

Albrecht

2006

Crop Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Oat (Avena sativa L.) grown for forage in the northern USA usually is sown in spring and harvested in early summer, with rapid decline in quality after boot stage. This study was conducted to determine if there are differences in forage yield and forage quality between summer sown-autumn harvested and spring sown-early summer harvested oat, and to determine whether seasonal effect is similar among oat cultivars that vary in maturity classification. Oat was sown in summer 2001 and spring 2002 at two locations in Wisconsin and harvested in autumn and early summer, respectively. Oat sown in August produced 6.7 Mg ha 21 of forage when harvested 77 d later, about 1.0 Mg ha 21 less than that obtained from spring sown oat harvested 77 d after sowing. Autumn forage yield was similar among oat cultivars due to decreasing daylength and temperature. Maturation of summer-sown oat was delayed, resulting in 10 to 15% less neutral detergent fiber (NDF), 18% greater digestibility, and 250% greater water soluble carbohydrate (WSC) concentration than spring-sown oat. High WSC levels are of particular importance since oat forage harvested in autumn will likely be stored as silage due to poor drying conditions in autumn. Differences in forage quality among cultivars and between spring and autumn oat forage are associated with maturity differences. Oat sown in late summer, and especially the leafy, late maturing cultivar ForagePlus, can supplement high quality forage production in autumn.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

“…other studies harvested at comparable maturity (Edmisten et al, 1998a;Folkins and Kaufmann, 1974;Stuthman and Marten, 1972;Cherney and Marten, 1982a).…”

Section: Forage Yield and Plant Maturitymentioning

confidence: 93%

Forage Production and Nutritive Value of Oat in Autumn and Early Summer

Contreras‐Govea

Albrecht

2006

Crop Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From the range of cultivars studied, the spring-type triticales A208 and A476 were of the best quality, though not always with the highest yield; the former character, however, led to these cultivars having the highest yield of digestible organic matter. Differences in leaf blade quality and content do not appear to affect total quality appreciably and this finding agrees with work on oat cultivars (Folkins & Kaufman 1974). However, differences in whole crop DOMD between cultivars were reflected in the DOMD of leaf blade material.…”

Section: ±0-78supporting

confidence: 85%

Relationship between growth stage and digestible organic matter in triticale

1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

S U M M A R YIn two experiments the yield, digestibility, protein and cell wall contents of several autumn-sown triticale cultivars were compared with rye at defined growth stages. Yields at each growth stage were highest in the triticale cultivars. The content of leaf blade and sheath fell with increased maturity while stem and ear content increased. There were differences between cultivars in the contribution of individual stem internodes. Digestibility also declined with maturity for all plant parts, and differences were apparent between pla"nt parts and between cultivars. Leaf blade showed a slow decline in digestibility whereas stem digestibility showed a rapid reduction so that, at growth stage 43, young stem internodes were of much higher quality than older ones. Spring-type triticales (A208 and A476) had the highest digestibility at stages from flag leaf emergence to anthesis. The relationships between digestibility, plant part contents and cell wall characteristics are discussed.

show abstract

“…En los años de evaluación la precipitación estuvo debajo de la media histórica, únicamente se acumuló el 33.9 % (206 mm) y el 71.1 % (437 mm) del promedio en el 2011 y 2012, respectivamente. En la Figura 1 se presenta la distribución mensual de la precipitación acumulada, así como las temperaturas máximas been reported that the stem, inflorescence and leaf, are closely linked to the nutritive forage quality and have also greater preference of consumption by the animal (13) .…”

Section: Materiales Y Métodosunclassified

“…Uno de los criterios importantes en la selección de alguna variedad de avena es la composición de la biomasa; se ha reportado que la cantidad de las partes que la conforman, tallo, inflorescencia y hoja, están muy ligadas a la calidad nutritiva del forraje y además tienen mayor preferencia de consumo por el animal (13) .…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Producción y calidad de forraje de variedades de avena en condiciones de temporal en Zacatecas, México

Gutiérrez¹,

Bañuelos

Serna‐Pérez³

et al. 2014

RMCP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Se evaluó la producción, calidad y componentes de rendimiento de seis variedades de avena forrajera en Zacatecas. Los experimentos se establecieron en julio de 2011 y 2012 en el municipio de Monte Escobedo. El diseño experimental fue bloques completos al azar con tres repeticiones, la densidad de siembra fue 120 kg ha-1 y dosis de fertilización de 60-40-00 de N, P2O5, K. La cosecha fue en estado fisiológico lechoso-masoso. En 2011 y 2012, La variedad Saía sobresalió (P<0.05) entre cultivares en rendimiento de forraje seco con 3.7 y 5.6 ha-1, altura de planta con 119 y 120 cm, y en componentes de rendimiento acumuló la mayor (P<0.05) proporción de hoja y tallo. La variedad Karma sobresalió en proporción de espiga con 42 y 49 % (P<0.05) en 2011 y 2012, respectivamente. En proteína cruda losresultados fueron similares (P>0.05) entre variedades con un rango de 10.6 a 13.8 %. En los dos años de estudio Karma presentó las mejores características nutricionales: baja acumulación de fibra detergente neutro (51 %) y acida (33.4 y 35.3 %), valores altos en total de nutrientes digestibles (54 y 58 %), digestibilidad de la materia seca (60 y 62 %), valor relativo del forraje (110 y 113) y energía neta para lactación (1.4 y 1.34 Mcal/kg; P<0.05). Las variables asociadas de manera positiva con forraje seco fueron altura de planta (r=0.701), días a cosecha (r=0.685) y proporción de tallo (r=0.629), y negativamente con proporción de espiga (r=-0.629). En calidad nutricional Karma tuvo mejor valor forrajero. Saia es una buena alternativa para incrementar el rendimiento de forraje por hectárea.

show abstract

Yield and Morphological Studies With Oats for Forage and Grain Production

Cited by 11 publications

References 4 publications

Forage Production and Nutritive Value of Oat in Autumn and Early Summer

Forage Production and Nutritive Value of Oat in Autumn and Early Summer

Relationship between growth stage and digestible organic matter in triticale

Producción y calidad de forraje de variedades de avena en condiciones de temporal en Zacatecas, México

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About