Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:48:03.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stocker performance and production in mixed tall fescue–bermudagrass pastures of the Southern Piedmont USA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 April 2012

Alan J. Franzluebbers ,
John A. Stuedemann  and
Dwight H. Seman
Alan J. Franzluebbers*
Affiliation:
USDA–Agricultural Research Service, 1420 Experiment Station Road, Watkinsville GA 30677, USA
John A. Stuedemann
Affiliation:
USDA–Agricultural Research Service, 1420 Experiment Station Road, Watkinsville GA 30677, USA
Dwight H. Seman
Affiliation:
USDA–Agricultural Research Service, 1420 Experiment Station Road, Watkinsville GA 30677, USA
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Stocker performance and production from mixed cool- and warm-season perennial pastures are important determinants of agricultural sustainability that can be influenced by management. We evaluated the factorial combination of three sources of nutrient application (inorganic only, organic+inorganic combination, and organic only) and two forage utilization regimes [low grazing pressure (LGP) and high grazing pressure (HGP)] on steer stocking density and rate, performance and production during 7 years of pasture management {tall fescue [Lolium arundinaceum (Schreb.) Darbysh.] overseeded into existing Coastal bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.] sod} on a Typic Kanhapludult in Georgia, USA. Nutrient source had few major impacts on responses, except for lower animal performance with organic fertilization (broiler litter) than with organic+inorganic and inorganic only fertilization, especially with LGP. Seasonal changes in stocking weight and rate occurred, not only as expected due to environmental conditions and dominant forage species present, but that also counteracted expected differences imposed by grazing pressure; signaling negative feedback of HGP on forage productivity. Steer performance was greatest in spring and summer under both grazing pressures, but was significantly reduced with increasing grazing pressure in the autumn and winter due to low forage availability. Across years, steer gainha−1 (863kgha−1) was not different between grazing pressures, but gainha−1 declined with time under HGP and was stable with time under LGP. Reducing grazing pressure to a moderate level can lead to equivalent steer production as HGP, and would likely contribute to a more sustainable balance among production, socio-economic and environmental goals. These multi-year results will help cattle producers in warm, moist climates design and implement more sustainable grazing systems.

Keywords

botanical compositionbroiler littercattle productiongrazing pressureorganic fertilizerstocking density
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 28 , Issue 2 , June 2013 , pp. 160 - 172
Creative Commons
This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1USDA-NASS (National Agricultural Statistics Service). 2007. Census of Agriculture, Volume 1, U.S. Summary and State Reports. Available at Web site http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/index.asp (accessed March 30, 2012).Google Scholar
2Sanderson, M.A., Franzluebbers, A., Goslee, S., Kiniry, J., Owens, L., Spaeth, K., Steiner, J., and Veith, T. 2011. Pastureland conservation effects assessment project: Status and expected outcomes. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 66:148A–153A.Google Scholar
3Read, J.C. and Camp, B.J. 1986. The effects of the fungal endophyte Acremonium coenophialum in tall fescue on animal performance, toxicity, and stand maintenance. Agronomy Journal 78:848–850.Google Scholar
4Gunter, S.A. and Beck, P.A. 2004. Novel endophyte-infected tall fescue for growing beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 82:E75–E82.Google Scholar
5Franzluebbers, A.J. and Stuedemann, J.A. 2006. Pasture and cattle responses to fertilization and endophyte association in the southern Piedmont, USA. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 114:217–225.Google Scholar
6Hopkins, A.A. and Alison, M.W. 2006. Stand persistence and animal performance for tall fescue endophyte combinations in the South Central USA. Agronomy Journal 98:1221–1226.Google Scholar
7Bouton, J.H., Gates, R.N., Belesky, D.P., and Owsley, M. 1993. Yield and persistence of tall fescue in the southeastern coastal plain after removal of its endophyte. Agronomy Journal 85:52–55.Google Scholar
8Burns, J.C., Fisher, D.S., and Rottinghaus, G.E. 2006. Grazing influences on mass, nutritive value, and persistence of stockpiled Jesup tall fescue without and with novel and wild-type fungal endophytes. Crop Science 46:1898–1912.Google Scholar
9Vibart, R.E., Drewnoski, M.E., Poore, M.H., and Green, J.T. Jr 2008. Persistence and botanical composition of Jesup tall fescue with varying endophyte status after five years of stockpiling and intensive winter grazing. Online. Forage and Grazinglands doi:10.1094/FG-2008-0421-01-RS.Google Scholar
10Franzluebbers, A.J. and Stuedemann, J.A. 2009. Soil-profile organic carbon and total nitrogen during 12 years of pasture management in the Southern Piedmont USA. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 129:28–36.Google Scholar
11Guerrero, J.N., Conrad, B.E., Holt, E.C., and Wu, H. 1984. Prediction of animal performance on bermudagrass pasture from available forage. Agronomy Journal 76:577–580.Google Scholar
12Roth, L.D., Rouquette, F.M. Jr, and Ellis, W.C. 1990. Effects of herbage allowance on herbage and dietary attributes of Coastal bermudagrass. Journal of Animal Science 68:193–205.Google Scholar
13Franzluebbers, A.J., Wilkinson, S.R., and Stuedemann, J.A. 2004. Bermudagrass management in the Southern Piedmont USA. X. Coastal productivity and persistence in response to fertilization and defoliation regimes. Agronomy Journal 96:1400–1411.Google Scholar
14Burns, J.C. and Fisher, D.S. 2008. ‘Coastal’ and ‘Tifton 44’ bermudagrass availability on animal and pasture productivity. Agronomy Journal 100:1280–1288.Google Scholar
15Sollenberger, L.E. and Newman, Y.C. 2007. Grazing management. In Barnes, R.F, Nelson, C.J., Moore, K.J., and Collins, M. (eds). Forages, Vol. II, The Science of Grassland Agriculture, 6th ed.Wiley-Blackwell, Ames, IA. p. 651–659.Google Scholar
16Steiner, J.L. and Franzluebbers, A.J. 2009. Farming with grass–for people, for profit, for production, for protection. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 64:75A–80A.Google Scholar
17Brown, M.A., Brown, A.H. Jr, Jackson, W.G., and Miesner, J.R. 2001. Genotype×environment interactions in milk yield and quality in Angus, Brahman, and reciprocal-cross cows on different forage systems. Journal of Animal Science 79:1643–1649.Google Scholar
18Rayburn, E.B. 1993. Tall fescue management. Available at Web site http://www.caf.wvu.edu/∼forage/tallfesc.htm (accessed March 30, 2012).Google Scholar
19Smith, S.R., Hall, J.B., Johnson, G.D., and Peterson, P.R. 2009. Making the Most of Tall Fescue in Virginia. Available at Web site http://pubs.ext.vt.edu/418/418-050/418-050.html (accessed March 30, 2012).Google Scholar
20Stuedemann, J.A. and Franzluebbers, A.J. 2007. Cattle performance and production when grazing Bermudagrass at two forage mass levels in the southern Piedmont. Journal of Animal Science 85:1340–1350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21Bransby, D.I. 1989. Compromises in the design and conduct of grazing experiments. In Marten, G.C. (ed.). Grazing Research: Design, Methodology, and Analysis. Crop Science Society of America Special Publication Number 16. CSSA-ASA, Madison, WI, p. 53–67.Google Scholar
22Franzluebbers, A.J., Seman, D.H., and Stuedemann, J.A. 2012. Forage dynamics in mixed tall fescue–bermudagrass pastures of the Southern Piedmont USA. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment (in press).Google Scholar
23Stuedemann, J.A. and Hoveland, C.S. 1988. Fescue endophyte: history and impact on animal agriculture. Journal of Production Agriculture 1:39–44.Google Scholar
24Franzluebbers, A.J., Seman, D.H., and Stuedemann, J.A. 2009. Tall fescue persists and cattle perform well on a novel-endophyte association in the Southern Piedmont USA. Online. Forage and Grazinglands doi:1094/FG-2009-0227-01-RS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25Hill, G.M., Gates, R.N., and Burton, G.W. 1993. Forage quality and grazing steer performance from Tifton 85 and Tifton 78 bermudagrass pastures. Journal of Animal Science 71:3219–3225.Google Scholar
26Franzluebbers, A.J. and Stuedemann, J.A. 2010. Surface soil changes during twelve years of pasture management in the Southern Piedmont USA. Soil Science Society of America Journal 74:2131–2141.Google Scholar
27Belesky, D.P., Robbins, J.D., Stuedemann, J.A., Wilkinson, S.R., and Devine, O.J. 1987. Fungal endophyte infection-loline derivative alkaloid concentration of grazed tall fescue. Agronomy Journal 79:217–220.Google Scholar
28Belesky, D.P., Stuedemann, J.A., Plattner, R.D., and Wilkinson, S.R. 1988. Ergopeptine alkaloids in grazed tall fescue. Agronomy Journal 80:209–212.Google Scholar
29Pedreira, C.G.S., Sollenberger, L.E., and Mislevy, P. 1999. Productivity and nutritive value of ‘Florakirk’ bermudagrass as affected by grazing management. Agronomy Journal 91:796–801.Google Scholar
30NRC (National Research Council) 1996. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. 7th ed. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar