Harvesting Regimes Affect Brown Midrib Sorghum-Sudangrass and Brown Midrib Pearl Millet Forage Production and Quality

被引:19
作者
Machicek, Joshua A. [1 ]
Blaser, Brock C. [1 ]
Darapuneni, Murali [2 ]
Rhoades, Marty B. [1 ]
机构
[1] West Texas A&M Univ, Dept Agr Sci, 2501 4th Ave, Canyon, TX 79016 USA
[2] New Mexico State Univ, Agr Sci Ctr Tucumcari, Tucumcari, NM 88401 USA
来源
AGRONOMY-BASEL | 2019年 / 9卷 / 08期
关键词
harvesting strategies; forage yield and quality; forage sorghum; pearl millet; Texas High Plains; RESPONSES; YIELD;
D O I
10.3390/agronomy9080416
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
As water levels in the Ogallala Aquifer continue to decline in the Texas High Plains, alternative forage crops that utilize less water must be identified to meet the forage demand of the livestock industry in this region. A two-year (2016 and 2017) study was conducted at West Texas A&M University Nance Ranch near Canyon, TX to evaluate the forage production and quality of brown midrib (BMR) sorghum-sudangrass (SS) (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench ssp. Drummondii) and BMR pearl millet (PM) (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) Leeke)) harvested under three regimes (three 30-d, two 45-d, and one 90-d harvests). Sorghum-sudangrass consistently out yielded PM in total DM production in both tested years (yield range 3.96 to 6.28 Mg DM ha(-1) vs. 5.38 to 11.19 Mg DM ha(-1) in 2016 and 6.00 to 9.87 Mg DM ha(-1) vs. 6.53 to 15.51 Mg DM ha(-1) in 2017). Water use efficiency was higher in PM compared to SS. The 90-d harvesting regime maximized the water use efficiency and DM production compared to other regimes in both crops; however, some forage quality may be sacrificed. In general, the higher forage quality was achieved in shorter interval harvesting regimes (frequent cuttings). The selection of suitable forage crop and harvesting regime based on this research can be extremely beneficial to the producers of Texas High Plains to meet their individual forage needs and demand.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]   PEARL-MILLET FOR FOOD, FEED, AND FORAGE [J].
ANDREWS, DJ ;
KUMAR, KA .
ADVANCES IN AGRONOMY, 1992, 48 :89-139
[2]  
Baltensperger D. D., 2002, Trends in new crops and new uses. Proceedings of the Fifth National Symposium, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 10-13 November, 2001, P100
[3]  
BISHNOI UR, 1993, TROP AGR, V70, P98
[4]   YIELD PROTEIN NITRATE AND PRUSSIC ACID CONTENT OF SUDANGRASS SUDANGRASS HYBRIDS AND PEARL MILLETS HARVESTED AT 2 CUTTING FREQUENCIES AND 2 STUBBLE HEIGHTS [J].
BURGER, AW ;
HITTLE, CN .
AGRONOMY JOURNAL, 1967, 59 (03) :259-+
[5]  
CHERNEY DJR, 1990, J ANIM SCI, V68, P4345
[6]   IRRIGATION IN THE TEXAS HIGH PLAINS: A BRIEF HISTORY AND POTENTIAL REDUCTIONS IN DEMAND [J].
Colaizzi, P. D. ;
Gowda, P. H. ;
Marek, T. H. ;
Porter, D. O. .
IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE, 2009, 58 (03) :257-274
[7]   THE INFLUENCE OF RATOON CROPPING ON SWEET SORGHUM YIELD, SUGAR PRODUCTION, AND INSECT DAMAGE [J].
DUNCAN, RR ;
GARDNER, WA .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE, 1984, 64 (02) :261-273
[8]  
Ejeta Gebisa, 2007, P187, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4020-6297-1_9
[9]  
El-Lattief E. A. A., 2011, Asian Journal of Crop Science, V3, P35, DOI 10.3923/ajcs.2011.35.42
[10]  
Latimer G.W., 2006, OFFICIAL METHODS ANA