Alfalfa‐bermudagrass mixtures managed under contrasting harvest strategies in the southeastern <scp>US</scp>

Abstract The incorporation of dual‐purpose alfalfa ( Medicago sativa L.) cultivars into bermudagrass ( Cynodon spp.) is a viable option to extend the grazing season in Southern forage systems. However, data are limited on which harvest management strategy (HMS) optimizes the use of alfalfa‐bermudagrass (ABG) mixtures in the Southern US. A two‐year study evaluated ABG mixtures under three HMS [cut only (CO), graze only (GO), or cut and graze (CG)].in Headland, AL and Tifton, GA. Alfalfa‐bermudagrass mixtures utilized in this evaluation were ‘Bulldog 805’ alfalfa that was interseeded into ‘Tifton 85’ bermudagrass. Treatments were evaluated for forage, animal, and total system performance. Herbage accumulation varied by year and location ( p &lt; .01), but the number of harvests ultimately determined the total forage produced. Forage allowance was never limiting but did differ among treatments at Tifton, GA ( p = .02). The CG HMS allowed for similar daily ( p &gt; .06) and liveweight gains ( p &gt; .56) on fewer days of grazing as compared to the GO treatments. The greater alfalfa percentage in the CG HMS translated to greater total digestible nutrients (TDN) and crude protein (CP), though not always statistically different. The CO HMS maximized system performance when evaluated for total gain (actual gains + predicted gains). However, the CG management allowed for more production opportunities across the season, thereby reducing economic risk. Future research should focus on evaluating the economic implications of introducing each HMS into ABG systems.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Grass and Forage Science
Published
2024-08-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/gfs.12687
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.14

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Alfalfa‐bermudagrass mixtures managed under contrasting harvest strategies in the southeastern US

Jennifer J Tucker, R. L. Stewart, Liliane Severino da Silva, Lisa L. Baxter et al.
2 citations
Grass and Forage Science
Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
1.14
article

Alfalfa‐bermudagrass mixtures managed under contrasting harvest strategies in the southeastern US

Jennifer J Tucker, R. L. Stewart, Liliane Severino da Silva, Lisa L. Baxter, Mary K Mullenix, Ana Caroline Cerqueira de Melo Vasco, Justin C. Burt, Christopher G. Prevatt
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract The incorporation of dual‐purpose alfalfa ( Medicago sativa L.) cultivars into bermudagrass ( Cynodon spp.) is a viable option to extend the grazing season in Southern forage systems. However, data are limited on which harvest management strategy (HMS) optimizes the use of alfalfa‐bermudagrass (ABG) mixtures in the Southern US. A two‐year study evaluated ABG mixtures under three HMS [cut only (CO), graze only (GO), or cut and graze (CG)].in Headland, AL and Tifton, GA. Alfalfa‐bermudagrass mixtures utilized in this evaluation were ‘Bulldog 805’ alfalfa that was interseeded into ‘Tifton 85’ bermudagrass. Treatments were evaluated for forage, animal, and total system performance. Herbage accumulation varied by year and location ( p &lt; .01), but the number of harvests ultimately determined the total forage produced. Forage allowance was never limiting but did differ among treatments at Tifton, GA ( p = .02). The CG HMS allowed for similar daily ( p &gt; .06) and liveweight gains ( p &gt; .56) on fewer days of grazing as compared to the GO treatments. The greater alfalfa percentage in the CG HMS translated to greater total digestible nutrients (TDN) and crude protein (CP), though not always statistically different. The CO HMS maximized system performance when evaluated for total gain (actual gains + predicted gains). However, the CG management allowed for more production opportunities across the season, thereby reducing economic risk. Future research should focus on evaluating the economic implications of introducing each HMS into ABG systems.

Grass and Forage ScienceVol. 79(4)
Midway University (US), University of Georgia (US), Alabama Farmers Federation (US), Clemson University (US), Auburn University (US)
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Auburn University, National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
1.14
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.