Evaluation of New Fall Rye Cultivar ‘Bono’ in Single and Double Cropping Systems

A new fall rye (FR, Secale cereale L.) cv. Bono was investigated as a novel cropping option in Saskatchewan, Canada. In this study, the performance of Bono was compared to Hazlet FR, and both cultivars were compared to winter triticale (WT, Triticosecale Wittm.) cv. Pika in single cropping (SC) or in double cropping (DC) systems with spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) was evaluated in the Dark Brown soil zone, 2019–2021. Five replicated (n = 4) treatments were: (i) BonoFR; (ii) HazletFR; (iii) PikaWT; (iv) Barley–BonoFR; and (v) Barley–HazletFR. The first crop of barley was harvested at soft dough stage, followed by the second crop of FR seeded in the same year and harvested between flag leaf to heading emergence the following summer for greenfeed hay. Bono did not differ (p > 0.05) in DMY (1.2 Mg ha−1) or nutritive value from Hazlet, however, both FRs differed (p = 0.01) from WT by higher nitrogen use efficiency (NUE, 41.0 vs. 33.7) and NDF (541.8 vs. 479.3 g kg–1), but lower CP (155.3 vs. 187.1 g kg–1). Double cropping barley with fall ryes increased total DMY, nutrients yield per ha, and minerals uptake by up to 83% and NUE by 35.3%. In conclusion, Bono fall rye could be an equal quality alternative to Hazlet, although the current higher seed price may delay its adoption

Evaluation of New Fall Rye Cultivar ‘Bono’ in Single and Double Cropping Systems

A new fall rye (FR, Secale cereale L.) cv. Bono was investigated as a novel cropping option in Saskatchewan, Canada. In this study, the performance of Bono was compared to Hazlet FR, and both cultivars were compared to winter triticale (WT, Triticosecale Wittm.) cv. Pika in single cropping (SC) or in double cropping (DC) systems with spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) was evaluated in the Dark Brown soil zone, 2019–2021. Five replicated (n = 4) treatments were: (i) BonoFR; (ii) HazletFR; (iii) PikaWT; (iv) Barley–BonoFR; and (v) Barley–HazletFR. The first crop of barley was harvested at soft dough stage, followed by the second crop of FR seeded in the same year and harvested between flag leaf to heading emergence the following summer for greenfeed hay. Bono did not differ (p > 0.05) in DMY (1.2 Mg ha−1) or nutritive value from Hazlet, however, both FRs differed (p = 0.01) from WT by higher nitrogen use efficiency (NUE, 41.0 vs. 33.7) and NDF (541.8 vs. 479.3 g kg–1), but lower CP (155.3 vs. 187.1 g kg–1). Double cropping barley with fall ryes increased total DMY, nutrients yield per ha, and minerals uptake by up to 83% and NUE by 35.3%. In conclusion, Bono fall rye could be an equal quality alternative to Hazlet, although the current higher seed price may delay its adoption

Evaluation of sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia) for forage yield and persistence in sainfoin-alfalfa (Medicago sativa) mixtures and under different harvest frequencies

Condensed tannins in sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia) improves forage digestion and reduce the risk of ruminant bloat caused by grazing alfalfa (Medicago sativa). The objectives of this study were to evaluate the forage dry matter yield (DMY) and persistence of newer sainfoin cultivars in mixtures with alfalfa, and to determine the impact of harvest frequency on persistence of sainfoin. Sainfoin cultivars, ‘AAC Mountainview’, ‘AAC Glenview’, ‘Delaney’, ‘Shoshone’ and six experimental populations were compared with ‘Nova’ and ‘Melrose’ at Lanigan, SK Canada from 2016 to 2018. Field plots were seeded in either monocultures of sainfoin at 33 kg ha–1 or sainfoin -‘AC Grazeland’ alfalfa mixtures at 16 kg ha–1: 9 kg ha–1 in alternate rows. Forage DMY was greater (P=0.001) in mixtures than sainfoin monocultures in all harvests. The proportion of sainfoin in mixtures at Cut 1 declined from 4.1 to 1.3% of total DMY from 2016 to 2018, and 19.0 to 4.8% in Cut 2, which was less than the recommended level to eliminate ruminant bloat risk. A second field trial was established in 2017 to compare responses of ‘AAC Mountainview’, ‘Nova’ and ‘Shoshone’ sainfoin under one-, two- or three-harvest frequencies in 2018 and 2019. The increase of harvest frequency did not reduce sainfoin stand (%). Stand percentage of ‘AAC Mountainview’ (91%) was greater (P=0.01) than ‘Nova’ sainfoin (62%). Further agronomic studies focusing on weed control in sainfoin stands, and optimum seeding ratios of sainfoin-alfalfa within the Parkland region of Saskatchewan are needed.The accepted manuscript in pdf format is listed with the files at the bottom of this page. The presentation of the authors' names and (or) special characters in the title of the manuscript may differ slightly between what is listed on this page and what is listed in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript; that in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript is what was submitted by the author

Nitrogen Fixation and Resource Partitioning in Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), Cicer Milkvetch (Astragalus cicer L.) and Sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia Scop.) Using 15N Enrichment under Controlled Environment Conditions

Availability of nitrogen (N) limits pasture production. Inclusion of legumes into grass pastures can provide an alternative N source through biological N2 fixation (BNF), and enhance retention and cycling of soil C and N. Despite the use of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), cicer milkvetch (Astragalus cicer L.) and sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia Scop.) in grass-legume pastures to improve forage quality, relative BNF potentials and resource partitioning are unknown. We quantified BNF using 15N isotope dilution and estimated resource partitioning in alfalfa, two cultivars of cicer milkvetch and two cultivars of sainfoin under controlled conditions. Percentage of nitrogen derived from atmosphere followed the order alfalfa (92%) > cicer milkvetch (87%) > sainfoin (81%); corresponding to estimated N contributions of 200, 128 and 65 kg N ha−1 yr−1, respectively, based on total herbage. Root dry matter was 24% to 36% greater than shoot dry matter in all of the legumes, providing substantial below-ground C and N. Cultivars of the same species did not differ in any measured parameter (p > 0.05). Despite the lower BNF in cicer milkvetch and sainfoin compared to alfalfa, their use may not negatively affect stand productivity and C storage

Impact of condensed tannin containing legumes on ruminal fermentation, nutrition and performance in ruminants: a review

Legume forages, such as sainfoin, and birdsfoot trefoil can increase the forage quality and quantity of western Canadian pastures, thus increasing producer profitability due to increased gains in grazing ruminants, while reducing risk of bloat in legume pastures due to the presence of proanthocyanidins. Proanthocyanidins or condensed tannins (CT) are secondary plant polyphenol compounds that have been regarded as anti-nutritional due to their ability to bind protein in feeds, enzymes, and microbial cells, therefore disrupting microbial digestion and slowing ruminal protein and dry matter digestion. Research has shown that at high concentrations (>50 g kg-1 DM), CT can disrupt microbial digestion. However, at low dietary inclusion rates (5-10 g kg-1 DM) they reduce bloat risk, and increase ruminal undegradable protein (RUP), reduce enteric methane production, and confer anthelmintic activity. Yet, research gaps still exist regarding grazing persistence and forage yield of novel CT containing forages and their biological activity due to their vast differences in CT stereochemistry, polymer size, and intermolecular linkages. The objectives of this review are to summarize information regarding the impact of CT on ruminal fermentation, carbohydrate and protein metabolism, and the potential to identify and select for forages that contain condensed tannins for ruminant production.The accepted manuscript in pdf format is listed with the files at the bottom of this page. The presentation of the authors' names and (or) special characters in the title of the manuscript may differ slightly between what is listed on this page and what is listed in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript; that in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript is what was submitted by the author

Evaluation of Alfalfa and Grass Species in Binary and Complex Mixtures on Performance under Soil Salinity Conditions

The effect of synergies between saline-tolerant grass and legume species grown in saline soil, on yield, quality, composition, persistence, and weed suppression was studied in 2019–2021 in a moderately saline soil located in the dark brown soil zone near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. ‘Halo’ alfalfa (ALF), a salt-tolerant cultivar of alfalfa, was seeded in binary mixtures with ‘Revenue’ slender wheatgrass (ALF-SWG), ‘Garrison’ creeping meadow foxtail (ALF-CMF), and ‘Radisson’ smooth bromegrass (ALF-SBG). A complex mixture (quaternary) with all three grasses was also included. Four replicated treatments (n = 4) were randomly allocated to 6.2 × 1.2 m plots in spring 2019. The binary mixtures had similar or slightly better stand establishment compared to the quaternary mixture over the two years (83.3 vs. 76.9%), the quaternary stand showed greater (p = 0.01) establishment in Yr 2 than in Yr 1 (85 vs. 68.8%). There was high weed infestation in all the stands, but ALF-SWG had less weed infestation (23.8 vs. 44.1%) than ALF-CMF, especially in Yr 2 (p = 0.05). There were no significant differences among mixtures in yield, nutritional composition, and nutrient uptake. The ALF-CMF and ALF-SWG binary mixtures had 9 to 23% greater mean total DMY than the other mixtures in the moderately saline soil. The cost of establishing forage mixtures on unproductive saline land can be up to 89% recovered after only two years. The results suggested that binary mixtures of ‘Halo’ alfalfa with ‘Revenue’ slender wheatgrass or ‘Garrison’ creeping meadow foxtail could be reasonable alternatives for adequate forage production and quality, high N-use efficiency, and ultimately livestock gain per hectare, as well as for controlling soil salinity and improving soil fertility in this saline area in the dark brown soil zone

Alternative forage feeds for beef cattle in Northwestern Alberta, Canada: forage yield and nutritive value of forage brassicas and forbs

Forbs and forage brassicas are non-traditional forage crops in northwestern Alberta, Canada. Ten forage brassicas (barkant turnips, bayou kale hybrid, daikon radish, collard, inka brand marrowstem kale, malwira turnip rape, purple top turnips, tillage radish, vivant hybrid cross and winfred) and four forbs (buckwheat, chicory, plantain and phacelia) were seeded on 25 May 2018 and 23 May 2019. The above-ground parts of plants were harvested for forage yield and nutritive quality on 15 August 2018 and 29 August 2019. Forage dry matter (DM) yield, crude protein (CP) and total digestible nutrients (TDN) respectively varied from 2953 to 10740 kg DM ha−1, 12.2–23.5% CP and 58.8–77.9% TDN. Some crops had no nitrate (ant-nutritional factor) detected, while six crops (bayou kale cross, chicory, phacelia, plantain, purple top turnips and tillage radish) had nitrate concentrations ranging 0.26–0.56%, considered toxic for beef cattle. In general, the brassicas and forbs investigated produced forage with high nutritional quality. Based on forage DM yield and nitrate level in the forage, the crops with the most attractive forage options that can provide alternative forage feed for beef cattle production from this study would be buckwheat, daikon radish, inka brand marrowstem kale and forage collards

Harvest Date Effect on Forage Yield, Botanical Composition, and Nutritive Value of Novel Legume-Grass Mixtures

The potential for novel forage mixtures to address reduced herbage for late season grazing was investigated. Forage legumes, sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia Scop.) (SF) cvs. AC Mountainview, Shoshone, and Nova (MountainSF, ShoshoneSF, and NovaSF), cicer milkvetch (Astragalus cicer L.) cv. AC Veldt (CMV), Canadian milkvetch (Astragalus canadensis L.) cv. Great Plains (CaMV), and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) cv. AC Yellowhead (ALF) were evaluated in binary mixtures with meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rehm.) cv. Admiral (MBG), hybrid bromegrass (B. riparius × B. inermis Leyss.) cv. AC Success (HBG) and Russian wildrye [Psathyrostachys junceus (Fisch.) Nevski.] cv. Tom (RWR) for yield, botanical composition, and nutritive value on July and September harvest dates at Saskatoon and Swift Current, Saskatchewan, Canada from 2016 to 2018. Hybrid bromegrass-legume mixture produced 16–38% greater forage compared to RWR-legume (7.5 vs. 5.6 Mg ha−1 in July and 6.1 vs. 5.1 Mg ha−1 in September at Saskatoon, and 3.2 vs. 2.0 Mg ha−1 in July at Swift Current). MountainSF and ALF had the greatest legume contribution to total yield at July harvest at Swift Current (67.7 ± 3.2%) and Saskatoon (62.1 ± 2.1%), respectively, while CaMV had lowest composition at Swift Current (20.2 ± 2.5%) and Saskatoon (12.6 ± 3.5%). The CMV and ALF-grass mixtures at Saskatoon and legume-RWR mixtures at both sites in July had greatest CP content. The July harvest had greatest yield, legume content and nutritive value compared to the September harvest at both sites. Study results suggest if yield is the objective, then either ALF or CMV with HBG may be considered. If nutritive value is the goal, any legume with RWR is an option. Finally, ALF or CMV in mixture with either HBG or RWR could be summer or fall stockpile forage in the Northern Great Plains of western Canada

Effect of sod-seeding bloat-free legumes on pasture productivity, steer performance, and production economics

A five-year experiment evaluated the effects of sod-seeding sainfoin and cicer milkvetch into monoculture grass (Lanigan, SK) or legume (Lethbridge, AB) stands on pasture productivity, steer performance, and economics. At Lanigan, sainfoin decreased (treatment year P = 0.01) from 13% in yr 1 to 2% in yr 2 (% plant population) and did not differ thereafter, while cicer milkvetch, maintained a proportion of 16% in the stand. Forage yield was greater (treatment year; PThe accepted manuscript in pdf format is listed with the files at the bottom of this page. The presentation of the authors' names and (or) special characters in the title of the manuscript may differ slightly between what is listed on this page and what is listed in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript; that in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript is what was submitted by the author