scholarly journals Chlorophyll, Dry Matter, and Photosynthetic Conversion-Efficiency Relationships in Warm-Season Grasses

1983 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 431 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. G. Bokari
Author(s):  
S M Ghajar ◽  
H McKenzie ◽  
J Fike ◽  
B McIntosh ◽  
B F Tracy

Abstract Introduced cool-season grasses are dominant in Virginia’s grasslands, but their high digestible energy and non-structural carbohydrate (NSC) levels pose a risk for horses prone to obesity and laminitis. Native warm-season grasses (NWSG) have lower digestible energy and NSC levels that may be more suitable for horses susceptible to laminitis. Although NWSGs have desirable characteristics, they are novel forages for horses. Little is known about NWSG intake or potential toxicity to horses or how grazing by horses may affect NWSG swards. The overall objectives of this research were to 1) assess voluntary intake, toxicological response, and apparent digestibility of NWSG hays fed to horses; and 2) evaluate the characteristics of three NWSG species under equine grazing. For the first objective, a hay feeding trial using indiangrass (IG) (Sorghastrum nutans) and big bluestem (BB) (Andropogon gerardii) was conducted with 9 Thoroughbred geldings in a replicated 3 x 3 Latin square design. Voluntary dry matter intake of IG and BB hays by horses were 1.3% and 1.1% of BW/d, lower than orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata), an introduced cool-season grass, at 1.7% of BW/d (P = 0.0020). Biomarkers for hepatotoxicity remained within acceptable ranges for all treatments. Apparent dry matter digestibility (DMD) did not differ among hays, ranging from 39 to 43%. Non-structural carbohydrate levels ranged from 4.4 to 5.4%, below maximum recommended concentrations for horses susceptible to laminitis. For the second objective, a grazing trial was conducted comparing IG, BB, and eastern gamagrass (Tripsacum dactyloides) (EG) yields, forage losses, changes in vegetative composition, and effects on equine bodyweight. Nine, 0.1-hectare plots were seeded with one of the three native grass treatments, and each plot was grazed by one Thoroughbred gelding in two grazing bouts, one in July and another in September 2019. Indiangrass had the greatest available forage, at 4340 kg/ha, compared with 3590 kg/ha from BB (P < 0.0001). Eastern gamagrass plots established poorly, and had only 650 kg/ha available forage during the experiment. Grazing reduced standing cover of native grasses in IG and BB treatments by about 30%. Horses lost 0.5 to 1.5 kg BW/d on all treatments. Findings suggest indiangrass and big bluestem merit further consideration as forages for horses susceptible to obesity and pasture-associated laminitis.


1979 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 52 ◽  
Author(s):  
William L. Gilbert ◽  
L. J. Perry ◽  
J. Stubbendieck

Crop Science ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 874 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. C. Madakadze ◽  
K. A. Stewart ◽  
R. M. Madakadze ◽  
D. L. Smith

Weed Science ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Peters ◽  
Russell S. Moomaw ◽  
Alex R. Martin

The control of three summer annual grass weeds with herbicides during establishment of forage grasses was studied near Concord and Mead, NE, in 1984, 1985, and 1986. Three cool-season forage grasses, intermediate wheatgrass, tall fescue, and smooth bromegrass, and two warm-season grasses, big bluestem and switchgrass, were included. The control of three major summer annual grasses, green foxtail, barnyardgrass, and large crabgrass, was excellent with fenoxaprop at 0.22 kg ai/ha. Slight to moderate injury to cool-season forage grasses and severe injury to warm-season grasses were evident. Sethoxydim at 0.22 kg ai/ha and haloxyfop at 0.11 kg ai/ha controlled green foxtail and large crabgrass, but not barnyardgrass. Sulfometuron-treated big bluestem and switchgrass plots had the best forage stand frequencies and yields and, at the rate used, sulfometuron satisfactorily controlled green foxtail but only marginally controlled barnyardgrass and large crabgrass.


1992 ◽  
Vol 70 (8) ◽  
pp. 1596-1602 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. P. Bentivenga ◽  
B. A. D. Hetrick

Previous research on North American tallgrass prairie grasses has shown that warm-season grasses rely heavily on vesicular–arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis, while cool-season grasses are less dependent on the symbiosis (i.e., receive less benefit). This led to the hypothesis that cool-season grasses are less dependent on the symbiosis, because the growth of these plants occurs when mycorrhizal fungi are inactive. Field studies were performed to assess the effect of phenology of cool- and warm-season grasses on mycorrhizal fungal activity and fungal species composition. Mycorrhizal fungal activity in field samples was assessed using the vital stain nitro blue tetrazolium in addition to traditional staining techniques. Mycorrhizal activity was greater in cool-season grasses than in warm-season grasses early (April and May) and late (December) in the growing season, while mycorrhizal activity in roots of the warm-season grasses was greater (compared with cool-season grasses) in midseason (July and August). Active mycorrhizal colonization was relatively high in both groups of grasses late in the growing season, suggesting that mycorrhizal fungi may proliferate internally or may be parasitic at this time. Total Glomales sporulation was generally greater in the rhizosphere of cool-season grasses in June and in the rhizosphere of the warm-season grasses in October. A growth chamber experiment was conducted to examine the effect of temperature on mycorrhizal dependence of cool- and warm-season grasses. For both groups of grasses, mycorrhizal dependence was greatest at the temperature that favored growth of the host. The results suggest that mycorrhizal fungi are active in roots when cool-season grasses are growing and that cool-season grasses may receive benefit from the symbiosis under relatively cool temperature regimes. Key words: cool-season grasses, tallgrass prairie, vesicular–arbuscular mycorrhizae, warm-season grasses.


2017 ◽  
Vol 95 (7) ◽  
pp. 3143-3153 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. M. Backus ◽  
J. C. Waller ◽  
G. E Bates ◽  
C. A. Harper ◽  
A. Saxton ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 112 (1) ◽  
pp. 301-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher N. Boyer ◽  
Katelynn Zechiel ◽  
Patrick D. Keyser ◽  
Justin Rhinehart ◽  
Gary E. Bates

1982 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 657-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. W. TAYLOR ◽  
D. W. ALLINSON

Animal production in New England has been limited by inadequate forage during mid- to late summer when cool-season grasses are in summer dormancy. Big bluestem (Andropogon gerardi Vitman), indiangrass [Sorghastrum nutans (L.) Nash] and switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) are warm-season grasses that may be a perennial source of summer forage. Since production of these warm-season grasses would be limited to the less fertile soils of the region, a greenhouse study was conducted to examine the growth and quality of these species in five acid, infertile soils as well as fertilizer-amended soils. The soils were fertilized with limestone (L), limestone plus nitrogen (LN), limestone, nitrogen plus phosphorus (LNP), and limestone, nitrogen, phosphorus plus potassium (LNPK). Limestone was applied to adjust soils to a pH of 6.5. Fertilizer was applied at rates of 45, 117 and 111 kg/ha of N, P and K, respectively. First harvest yields were greatest for switchgrass and big bluestem, but indiangrass produced significantly greater yields than either of the other grasses in the second harvest. In both harvests, the yields of all grasses were greatest under the LNP and LNPK fertility regimes. Nitrogen, without P, did not significantly increase yields above the control treatment in the first harvest. Yield responses to P fertilization varied with soils. Although P appeared to be the limiting factor insofar as growth was concerned, the yield response from P fertilization would probably be limited without N fertilization. Indiangrass was significantly higher in crude protein and K concentration and significantly lower in Ca concentration than big bluestem and switchgrass. Phosphorus concentrations were below the recommended levels for ruminant nutrition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document