1 / 50

Selecting forage species for your farm

Selecting forage species for your farm . Gilles Bélanger Soils and Crops Research and Development Centre Agriculture and Agri -Food Canada. Species and mixtures. Species Legumes (6) and grasses (11) Mixtures in Atlantic Canada (18), Québec (15), and Ontario (12) «  Tool Box »

miyo
Download Presentation

Selecting forage species for your farm

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Selecting forage species for your farm Gilles Bélanger Soils and Crops Research and Development Centre Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

  2. Species and mixtures • Species • Legumes (6) and grasses (11) • Mixtures in Atlantic Canada (18), Québec (15), and Ontario (12) • « Tool Box » • Good compared to other areas

  3. Speciesrecommended or available in eastern Canada Legumespecies • Alfalfa • Redclover • White clover • Birdsfoottrefoil • Alsikeclover • Sweetclover • Grass species • Timothy • Meadowbromegrass • Smoothbromegrass • Orchardgrass • Tallfescue • Reed canarygrass • Meadowfescue • Kentucky bluegrass • Perennialryegrass • Creepingredfescue • Meadowfoxtail 3

  4. Alfalfa, the « dreamcrop » • Very good yield and nutritive value • Verytolerant to heat and drought • 3-5 years if wellmanaged

  5. Alfalfa, the « queencropwithspecificrequirements» • Sensitive to winter conditions • Not tolerant: • Soilacidity (optimal pH = 6.6 à 7.0) • Poor drainage • Frequentclipping and grazing

  6. Fallcutting management of alfalfa - Truro Yield (T/ha) 1993 9.8 11.9 11.6 11.3 2Cuts 400 GDD 500 GDD 600 GDD 1994 8.3 6.5 6.7 8.1 1995 7.1 4.8 5.0 5.6 Apica 3rdcut Source: Bélanger et al. 1999. Can. J. Plant Sci. 79: 57-63.

  7. Fallcutting management of alfalfa - Truro Yield (T/ha) 1993 9.8 11.9 11.6 11.3 2Cuts 400 GDD 500 GDD 600 GDD 1994 8.3 6.5 6.7 8.1 1995 7.1 4.8 5.0 5.6 Apica 3rdcut Source: Bélanger et al. 1999. Can. J. Plant Sci. 79: 57-63.

  8. Fallcutting management of alfalfa - Normandin Yield (T/ha) 1997 5.2 6.8 7.0 7.1 2Cuts 400 GDD 500 GDD 600 GDD 1998 7.8 6.9 10.6 11.3 1999 4.6 Dead Dead Dead AC Caribou 3rdcut Source: Dhont et al. 2004. CropSci. 44: 144-157.

  9. Redclover, the « oldcrop » • Very good yield • Lessthanalfalfa • Good nutritive value • Betterthanalfalfa for someattributes • Fastestablishement • Less sensitive to poor drainage and aciditythanalfalfa • Adapted to short rotations 9

  10. White clover, the « littlecrop » • Averageyield • Averagetolerance to acidity and poor drainage • Tolerance to frequentcuts and grazing • Mostly for grazing • Variable persistence 10

  11. Birdsfoottrefoil, the « tough crop » • Legume, the mosttolerant to acidity and poor drainage • Averagetolerance to grazing • Slow to establish • Loweryieldthanalfalfa 11

  12. NDF concentration and digestibility Average of two years, Normandin(QC). Source: Pelletier et al. 2010. Agron. J. 102: 1388-1398.

  13. NDF concentration and digestibility Average of two years, Normandin(QC). Source: Pelletier et al. 2010. Agron. J. 102: 1388-1398.

  14. Non structural carbohydrates (Sugars) Source: Pelletier et al. 2010. Agron. J. 102: 1388-1398.

  15. Timothy, « boring but reliable » • Grass species, the mostcultivated in eastern Canada • Reliable and predictable • Excellent persistence • Timothy, 25 years: • Annualyield: 6 T/ha. • 90% timothy. Source: Bélanger et al. 1989. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69: 501-512. 15

  16. Simulatedicesheets Regrowthafter 107 daysunder plastic bags • Sensitivity: redclover = orchardgrass > alfalfa > timothy • Source: Bertrand et al. 2000. Plant Cell Environ. 24: 1085-1093.

  17. Timothy, « boring but reliable » • Not tolerant to heat and drought • Poor summerregrowth • Not tolerant to frequentcutting • Idealspecies for cows in transition 17

  18. Dietary cation-anion difference Source: Tremblay et al. 2006. Agron. J. 98: 339-348.

  19. Tallfescue, « pretty but not alwaysliked » • Good tolerance to soilacidity • Average persistance • Less persistant thantimothy but more thanorchardgrass • Tolerant to heat and drought • Good growth in summer and fall 19

  20. 12 10 2ndcut 37 % 8 29 % Yield (T/ha) 6 4 2 63 % 71 % 1stcut 0 Tallfescue Timothy Betterregrowththantimothy Harvest, 20 June – Average of 2 years

  21. Tall fescue Timothy Digestibility 6 June 90 12 June 85 20 June Digestibility (% DM) 80 27 June 75 3 4 5 6 7 8 Yield (T/ha) Average of 2 years • Better nutritive value thantimothy • Poor acceptability in pastures

  22. Orchardgrass, « does not agewell » • Tolerant to heat and drought • Good growth in summer • Tolerant to frequentcuts and grazing • Earlyheading • Cutat the right time • Sensitive to winter • Sensible to poor drainage 22

  23. Smoothbromegrass • Good persistance • Tolerant to heat and drought • Sensititive to poor drainage • Not tolerant to frequentcuts and grazing • Slow establishment 23

  24. Meadowbromegrass, « new kid on the block » • Good persistence • Tolerant to heat and drought • Tolerant to frequentcuts and grazing • Sensitive to poor drainage • Slow establishment 24

  25. Meadowfescue vs. Meadowbromegrass • Normandin • 4 cuts per year Production year Source: Drapeau et al. 2002. Can. J. Plant Sci. 89: 1059-1063.

  26. Reed canarygrass, «tall and tough» • Tolerant to poor drainage and soilacidity • Tolerant to frequentcuts and grazing • Adapted to harvesting and grazing • Very good persistence 26

  27. Comparing the yield of severalspecies • Fredericton • 2 cuts per year • Average of twoyears Source: Bolinder et al. 2002. Can. J. Plant Sci. 82: 731-737.

  28. Digestibility vs. yield • Normandin • 2 cuts per year • Average of twoyears Source: Pelletier et al. 2010. Agron. J. 102: 1388-1398.

  29. Digestibility vs. yield • Normandin • 2 cuts per year • Average of twoyears Pelletier et al. 2010. Agron. J. 102: 1388-1398.

  30. Digestibility vs. yield • Normandin • 2 cuts per year • Average of twoyears Source: Pelletier et al. 2010. Agron. J. 102: 1388-1398.

  31. Digestibility vs. yield • Normandin • 2 cuts per year • Average of twoyears Source: Pelletier et al. 2010. Agron. J. 102: 1388-1398.

  32. Why use mixtures? • More productive than pure stands • More competitionagaintsweeds • Adapted to a wide range of conditions • Better plant population (insurance) • Simple mixtures (2 to 4 species) recommended in eastern Canada 32

  33. Species and mixtures for myownfarm • Adaptation of species to local growing conditions • Soil and climate • Objective • Conservedfeed and/or grazing • Cutting/grazingintensity (high quality forage) • Expected stand duration • Specialneeds: Hay for dry cows • For mixtures: persistance et maturity

  34. Some possible legume-grass mixtures First, choose the legumespecies • Fertile soils, good drainage, and pH > 6.5 • Alfalfa • Intensive cutting for high quality • Orchardgrass • Greaterrisks of winter damage • Tallfescue • Less intensive cutting • Timothy • Smoothbromegrass • Drier areas 34

  35. Some possible legume-grass mixtures • Less favorable drainage and pH, or short rotations • Redclover • Intensive cutting • orchardgrass, tallfescue, reedcanarygrass • Less intensive cutting • timothy, smoothbromegrass 35

  36. Redclover mixtures Average of two sites and three production years Source: Lafrenière and Drapeau. 2011. Can. J. Plant Sci. 91: 91-97.

  37. Some possible legume-grass mixtures • Poorly drained soils and low pH • Trefoil • Timothy 37

  38. What’scoming? • Climate change • More risks of winter damage • Warmerfalls • Lesssnowcover • More freeze-thaw cycles • An additionnalharvest • Species: tallfescue, perennialryegrass ?? 38

  39. What’scoming? • Climate change • Increasedcost of N fertilizer • Greaterreliance on legumespecies • Legume-based mixtures • Improvedlegume persistance (redclover and alfalfa) • Increasedcost of grains • Greaterreliance on forages in rations • Improved nutritive value • Low-ligninalfalfa • Sweetgrass 39

  40. Successful forage production • Species, mixtures, and cultivars • Cutting management • Drainage, liming, and fertilization Choose the tools best adapted to yourgrowing conditions and yourneeds 40

  41. Gilles.Belanger@agr.gc.ca Questions, comments ?

  42. Stages of developmentatharvest of alfalfa (Average of 4 years; Fredericton)

  43. Stages of developmentatharvest of alfalfa Stages of developmentatharvest and number of harvests affect yield and nutritive value (Average of 4 years; Fredericton)

  44. Réserves dans les racines au cours de l’hiver

  45. Réserves dans les racines au cours de l’hiver

  46. Fallcutting management – Riskscale • Lessrisk • No fall cut. • Fall cut after first frost (-3ºC). • Fallcutwhenalfalfais in early bloom or at least 50 daysafter the precedingcut. • Fallcutregardless of stage of development or intervalbetweencuts. • More risk

  47. Mixtures are more productive … Seeding in 2008, Lévis (QC) 47

  48. … withlessweeds Seeding in 2008, Lévis (QC) 48

  49. Cutting management – Tallfescue Year 1 6.8 7.2 6.2 Yield(T/ha) Year3 6.0 4.5 4.1 Year 2 6.8 5.9 4.7 2 cuts 3 cuts 5 cuts Source: Drapeau et al. 2005. Can. J.PlantSci. 85: 369-376. Normandin, QC

  50. Impact of climate change on timothy yield and nutritive value

More Related