Genetic Control of Photoperiod Sensitivity, Selection for ...
Yield and nutritive value of photoperiod-sensitive … · Yield and nutritive value of...
6
Bean, B. W., Baumhardt, R. L., McCollum, F. T., & McCuistion, K. C. 2013. Comparison of sorghum classes for grain and forage yield and forage nutritive value. Field Crops Research. 142: 20–26. Lauriault, L. M., M. A. Marsalis, and D. M. VanLeeuwen. 2011. Selecting Sorghum Forages for Limited and Full Irrigation and Rainfed Conditions in Semiarid , Subtropical Environments. Forage and Grazinglands. doi:10.1094/FG-2011-0819-03-RS. BACKGROUND RESULTS AND DISCUSSION REFERENCES CONCLUSIONS Yield and nutritive value of photoperiod-sensitive sorghum and sorghum-sudangrass in central Wisconsin Elizabeth Remick 1 , Matt Akins 1 , Huawei Su 1 , Wayne Coblentz 2 1 Department of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI. 2 US Dairy Forage Research Center, Marshfield, WI ADSA/ASAS JAM 2016: Abstract # 16373 MATERIALS & METHODS OBJECTIVES . Evaluate the yield and nutrient composition of photoperiod sensitive and non photoperiod sensitive forage sorghum and sorghum-sudangrass compared to corn planted on 2 dates and harvested using single or multiple-cut strategies at 2 research stations (Marshfield and Hancock) in central Wisconsin. At each site: • Treatments were arranged in randomized complete block design with 4 replicates • Results were analyzed as a split-split plot design • planting date (early or mid-June) designated as main plot • harvest strategy (single or multi-cut) designated as sub-plot • 8 forage cultivars designated as sub-sub-plot • Plots harvested using multi-cut strategy were harvested in late August and early October • Data were analyzed independently for each location DM YIELD • Forage yields were greater from Hancock site compared to Marshfield. • At Hancock, DM yields were greater for the early compared to late planting date. • Yields of plots harvested using a single-cut strategy were 2-3 times greater than the combined forage yields of plots harvested with a multi-cut strategy. NUTRIENT CONTENT • There was a harvest strategy by variety interaction for all nutrients and locations • The single-cut strategy decreased NDF levels. • Differences between NDF levels by harvest strategy were most pronounced in varieties that developed a large seed head (BMR forage sorghum, sorghum- sudangrass and forage sorghum). • Crude protein was reduced for plots harvested using a single-cut strategy. • Crude protein levels at the Hancock site were lower than at the Marshfield site. • Plots harvested using the multi-cut strategy had greater in vitro digestibility than single-cut plots • PS and conventional sorghum-sudangrass hybrids had the lowest in vitro digestibility when harvested using the single-cut system. • In vitro NDF digestibility was increased for plots harvested using the multi-cut system. • TDN was increased in plots harvested using the multi-cut system owing to increased fiber digestibility. • Sorghum varieties with the highest yields generally had the lowest TDN values. • Multiple harvest corn and BMR sorghum varieties at Hancock had the highest TDN values while multiple harvest plots at Marshfield were all similarly distributed. • This project was partially supported by a Midwest Forage Association Research Grant. • This work is partially supported by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch project 1006557. Sorghum hybrids are becoming increasingly popular as a source of moderate quality forage in areas that experience drought stress regularly. Photo-period sensitive (PS) sorghum varieties have been developed for biofuel production because they remain vegetative until total daylight shortens to 12 h 20 m in the fall. PS sorghum hybrid varieties accumulate more dry matter than non PS sorghum-sudangrass, forage sorghum, BMR forage sorghum, and grain sorghum hybrids (Bean et al.,2013). PS sorghum hybrids also have a flexible harvest schedule because they remain vegetative until the first frost without significant deterioration of nutrient composition (Lauriault et al., 2011). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Figures 2 and 3 Table 2 and 3 Table 4 • At the Hancock site PS forage sorghum, PS sorghum-sudangrass, and conventional sorghum-sudangrass harvested with a single-cut strategy yielded more DM than corn. • At the Marshfield site the PS sorghum-sudangrass hybrid yielded comparably to corn. • PS sorghum-sudangrass and conventional sorghum-sudangrass offered the highest yield of moderate quality forage when harvested using a single cut system. • Sorghums should be harvested after a killing frost to maximize dry matter, further research is necessary to establish harvest recommendations. Table 1 Pictures
Transcript of Yield and nutritive value of photoperiod-sensitive … · Yield and nutritive value of...
Bean, B. W., Baumhardt, R. L., McCollum, F. T., & McCuistion, K. C. 2013. Comparison of sorghum classes for grain and forage yield and forage nutritive value. Field Crops Research. 142: 20–26.
Lauriault, L. M., M. A. Marsalis, and D. M. VanLeeuwen. 2011. Selecting Sorghum Forages for Limited and Full Irrigation and Rainfed Conditions in Semiarid , Subtropical Environments. Forage and Grazinglands.doi:10.1094/FG-2011-0819-03-RS.
BACKGROUND
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
CONCLUSIONS
Yield and nutritive value of photoperiod-sensitive sorghum and sorghum-sudangrassin central WisconsinElizabeth Remick1, Matt Akins1, Huawei Su1, Wayne Coblentz2
1Department of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.2US Dairy Forage Research Center, Marshfield, WIADSA/ASAS JAM 2016: Abstract # 16373
MATERIALS & METHODS
OBJECTIVES.
Evaluate the yield and nutrient composition of photoperiod sensitive and non photoperiod sensitive forage sorghum and sorghum-sudangrass compared to corn planted on 2 dates and harvested using single or multiple-cut strategies at 2 research stations (Marshfield and Hancock) in central Wisconsin.
At each site: • Treatments were arranged in randomized complete block design with 4
replicates• Results were analyzed as a split-split plot design
• planting date (early or mid-June) designated as main plot• harvest strategy (single or multi-cut) designated as sub-plot• 8 forage cultivars designated as sub-sub-plot
• Plots harvested using multi-cut strategy were harvested in late August and early October
• Data were analyzed independently for each location
DM YIELD• Forage yields were greater from Hancock site compared to Marshfield. • At Hancock, DM yields were greater for the early compared to late planting date.• Yields of plots harvested using a single-cut strategy were 2-3 times greater than
the combined forage yields of plots harvested with a multi-cut strategy.
NUTRIENT CONTENT• There was a harvest strategy by variety interaction for all nutrients and locations• The single-cut strategy decreased NDF levels. • Differences between NDF levels by harvest strategy were most pronounced in
varieties that developed a large seed head (BMR forage sorghum, sorghum-sudangrass and forage sorghum).
• Crude protein was reduced for plots harvested using a single-cut strategy.• Crude protein levels at the Hancock site were lower than at the Marshfield site.
• Plots harvested using the multi-cut strategy had greater in vitro digestibility than single-cut plots
• PS and conventional sorghum-sudangrass hybrids had the lowest in vitro digestibility when harvested using the single-cut system.
• In vitro NDF digestibility was increased for plots harvested using the multi-cut system.
• TDN was increased in plots harvested using the multi-cut system owing to increased fiber digestibility.
• Sorghum varieties with the highest yields generally had the lowest TDN values.• Multiple harvest corn and BMR sorghum varieties at Hancock had the highest
TDN values while multiple harvest plots at Marshfield were all similarly distributed.
• This project was partially supported by a Midwest Forage Association Research Grant.
• This work is partially supported by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch project 1006557.
Sorghum hybrids are becoming increasingly popular as a source of moderate quality forage in areas that experience drought stress regularly. Photo-period sensitive (PS) sorghum varieties have been developed for biofuel production because they remain vegetative until total daylight shortens to 12 h 20 m in the fall. PS sorghum hybrid varieties accumulate more dry matter than non PS sorghum-sudangrass, forage sorghum, BMR forage sorghum, and grain sorghum hybrids (Bean et al.,2013). PS sorghum hybrids also have a flexible harvest schedule because they remain vegetative until the first frost without significant deterioration of nutrient composition (Lauriault et al., 2011).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Figures 2 and 3 Table 2 and 3 Table 4
• At the Hancock site PS forage sorghum, PS sorghum-sudangrass, and conventional sorghum-sudangrass harvested with a single-cut strategy yielded more DM than corn.
• At the Marshfield site the PS sorghum-sudangrass hybrid yielded comparably to corn.
• PS sorghum-sudangrass and conventional sorghum-sudangrass offered the highest yield of moderate quality forage when harvested using a single cut system.
• Sorghums should be harvested after a killing frost to maximize dry matter, further research is necessary to establish harvest recommendations.
Table 1 Pictures
Yield and nutritive value of photoperiod-sensitive sorghum and sorghum-sudangrassin central WisconsinElizabeth Remick1, Matt Akins1, Huawei Su1, Wayne Coblentz2
1Department of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.2US Dairy Forage Research Center, Marshfield, WIADSA/ASAS JAM 2016: Abstract # 16373
.
Home Figures 1 and 2
Table 1. Corn hybrid and sorghum variety informationTreatment Hybrid/Variety CompanyCorn LNG9595 Legend SeedsForage sorghum AF8301 Alta SeedsSorghum-sudangrass AS5201 Alta SeedsPS forage sorghum1 4-Ever Green Walter Moss SeedsPS sorghum-sudangrass Mega Green Walter Moss SeedsBMR forage sorghum2 BMR 3411 Croplan®BMR sorghum-sudangrass Greentreat® 1731 Croplan®
PS BMR sorghum-sudangrass Greentreat® Rocket Croplan®1 PS = photoperiod sensitive2 BMR = brown mid-rib
Yield and nutritive value of photoperiod-sensitive sorghum and sorghum-sudangrassin central WisconsinElizabeth Remick1, Matt Akins1, Huawei Su1, Wayne Coblentz2
1Department of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.2US Dairy Forage Research Center, Marshfield, WIADSA/ASAS JAM 2016: Abstract # 16373
.
Home Table 2 and 3
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
BFS BSS C FS PBSG PFS PSS SS
Croplan Green Trt Corn AF 8301 Rocket 4 Evergreen Megagreen As5201
DM Y
eild
, kg
/ha
Hybrid
Early June, Single Early June, Multi Mid June, Single Mid June, Multi
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
BFS BSS C FS PBSG PFS PSS SS
Croplan Green Trt Corn AF 8301 Rocket 4 Evergreen Megagreen As5201
DM Y
eild
, kg
/ha
Hybrid
Early June, Single Early June, Multi Mid June, Single Mid June, Multi
Figure 1: Forage yields ( kg/ha) for sorghums and corn silage planted at 2 dates and using a single or multiple cut harvest strategy at Marshfield Agricultural Research Station.
Figure 2: Forage yields ( kg/ha) for sorghums and corn silage planted at 2 dates and using a single or multiple cut harvest strategy at Hancock Agricultural Research Station.
Treatment FactorsPlanting Date P = 0.01; SEM = 381
Harvest Method P < 0.01; SEM = 381Planting x Harvest P = 0.66 ; SEM = 538
Variety P < 0.01; SEM = 673Variety x Planting P = 0.58; SEM = 942Variety x Harvest P < 0.01; SEM = 942
Variety x Planting x Harvest P = 0.48; SEM = 1323
Treatment FactorsPlanting Date P = 0.84 ; SEM = 1211
Harvest Method P < 0.01 ; SEM = 1009Planting x Harvest P = 0.77 ; SEM =1233
Variety P < 0.01 ; SEM = 1233Variety x Planting P = 0.90 ; SEM = 1659 Variety x Harvest P = 0.02 ; SEM = 1524
Variety x Planting x Harvest P = 0.89 ; SEM = 2197Note: multi-harvest corn plots were harvested once
Yield and nutritive value of photoperiod-sensitive sorghum and sorghum-sudangrassin central WisconsinElizabeth Remick1, Matt Akins1, Huawei Su1, Wayne Coblentz2
1Department of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.2US Dairy Forage Research Center, Marshfield, WIADSA/ASAS JAM 2016: Abstract # 16373
.Table 2. Forage nutrient values (DM basis) of sorghums and corn silage sampled using a single or multiple cut harvest strategy at Hancock Agricultural Research Station
NDF CP IVTD IVNDFD TDNForage Harvest: Single Multi1 Single Multi1 Single Multi1 Single Multi1 Single Multi1
Corn Silage 49.7 65.5 6.0 7.5 77.9 77.7 55.5 66.0 67.4 65.3PS forage sorghum2 60.8 65.4 4.9 8.7 69.2 76.1 49.3 63.5 57.4 61.5
PS sorghum-sudan 62.3 66.7 5.4 8.2 64.7 74.5 43.4 61.9 53.3 60.6
Forage sorghum 53.2 64.9 6.0 8.5 70.9 77.6 45.2 65.7 60.2 63.9
Sorghum-sudan 52.2 65.6 6.3 7.8 67.9 75.1 38.5 62.1 57.2 61.8
BMR forage sorghum3 50.6 63.8 7.1 8.6 72.4 79.9 45.2 68.5 61.2 65.7
BMR sorghum-sudan 59.0 64.4 7.2 8.8 72.9 79.8 54.1 68.8 61.6 65.1
PS BMR sudangrass 54.7 63.3 7.2 9.1 76.2 81.5 56.4 70.8 62.9 65.5Treatment Factors
Variety P < 0.01SEM = 0.91
P < 0.01SEM = 0.31
P < 0.01SEM = 0.59
P < 0.01SEM = 0.91
P < 0.01SEM = 0.71
Harvest P < 0.01SEM = 0.66
P < 0.01SEM = 0.23
P < 0.01SEM = 0.30
P < 0.01SEM = 0.75
P < 0.01SEM = 0.36
Variety x Harvest P < 0.01SEM = 1.29
P < 0.01SEM = 0.45
P < 0.01SEM = 0.97
P < 0.01SEM = 1.37
P < 0.01SEM = 1.01
1 Corn was harvested once due to no regrowth; 2 PS = Photoperiod sensitive; 3 BMR = Brown mid-rib
Home Table 4
Table 3. Forage nutrient values (DM basis) for sorghums and corn silage sampled using a single or multiple cut harvest strategy at Marshfield Agricultural Research Station
NDF CP IVTD IVNDFD TDN
Forage: Harvest: Single Multi1 Single Multi1 Single Multi1 Single Multi1 Single Multi1
Corn Silage 51.1 65.5 6.6 10.0 75.5 80.3 51.9 69.9 64.3 66.5
PS forage sorghum2 60.8 63.2 6.6 13.3 74.3 80.1 57.7 70.0 62.1 66.1
PS sorghum-sudan 58.6 64.5 5.9 11.9 70.6 78.6 49.9 67.9 58.7 64.3
Forage sorghum 56.2 63.6 8.3 12.1 73.6 80.7 53.0 71.0 61.4 67.3
Sorghum-sudan 55.7 64.4 7.9 10.6 68.8 79.4 43.8 68.8 57.3 65.1
BMR forage sorghum3 51.9 62.1 7.9 12.3 75.2 83.5 52.2 74.3 63.8 69.1
BMR sorghum-sudan 59.2 62.5 8.1 12.6 76.0 81.4 59.5 71.7 63.8 67.4
PS BMR sudangrass 57.2 61.6 7.4 13.8 76.1 82.4 58.1 72.6 62.7 67.2Treatment Factors
Variety P = 0.01SEM = 1.05
P < 0.01SEM = 0.54
P < 0.01SEM = 0.82
P < 0.01SEM = 1.04
P < 0.01SEM = 0.72
Harvest P < 0.01SEM = 0.66
P < 0.01SEM = 0.40
P < 0.01SEM = 0.58
P < 0.01SEM = 0.83
P < 0.01SEM = 0.53
Variety x Harvest P < 0.01SEM = 1.77
P < 0.01SEM = 0.78
P = 0.06SEM = 1.22
P < 0.01SEM = 1.72
P = 0.05SEM = 1.10
1 Corn was harvested once due to no regrowth; 2 PS = Photoperiod sensitive; 3 BMR = Brown mid-rib
Yield and nutritive value of photoperiod-sensitive sorghum and sorghum-sudangrassin central WisconsinElizabeth Remick1, Matt Akins1, Huawei Su1, Wayne Coblentz2
1Department of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.2US Dairy Forage Research Center, Marshfield, WIADSA/ASAS JAM 2016: Abstract # 16373
.
Table 4. Forage nutrient values (DM basis) of sorghums and corn silage1 planted at two dates and sampled using a single or multiple cut harvest strategy at Hancock and Marshfield Agricultural Research Stations.
NDF CP IVTD IVNDFD TDN
Location: Single Multi1 Single Multi1 Single Multi1 Single Multi3 Single Multi1
Hancock
Early June 54.62 65.47 6.13 8.59 71.59 76.36 48.04 63.99 60.42 62.53
Mid- June 56.06 64.41 6.35 8.20 71.42 79.20 48.85 67.82 59.84 64.80
Planting x Harvest (P =) 0.06 0.14 0.01 0.16 0.02
SEM 0.81 0.31 0.49 1.04 0.50
Marshfield
Early June 55.49 63.98 7.18 11.14 73.38 80.37 51.85 70.37 61.71 66.44
Mid- June 57.20 62.87 7.49 13.00 74.11 81.23 54.67 71.18 61.83 66.76
Planting x Harvest (P =) 0.19 0.04 0.89 0.43 0.86
SEM 1.01 0.46 0.70 1.23 0.70
1Corn was harvested once due to no regrowth
Home
Yield and nutritive value of photoperiod-sensitive sorghum and sorghum-sudangrassin central WisconsinElizabeth Remick1, Matt Akins1, Huawei Su1, Wayne Coblentz2
1Department of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.2US Dairy Forage Research Center, Marshfield, WIADSA/ASAS JAM 2016: Abstract # 16373
.
Home
