{"title":"Decade-long persistence, production, and profitability of tall fescue–alfalfa mixtures and nitrogen-fertilized tall fescue","authors":"M. Anowarul Islam, Michael M. Baidoo","doi":"10.1002/agj2.70124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Concerns about forage crop productivity often focus on persistence. Research shows that binary grass–legume mixtures yield more than nitrogen (N)-fertilized grass monocultures. However, their long-term ability to sustain higher production and profits remains uncertain. To address this, a 10-year field study was conducted at the University of Wyoming James C. Hageman Sustainable Agriculture Research and Extension Center at Lingle, WY. The study evaluated forage accumulation, nutritive value, and profitability of tall fescue [<i>Lolium arundinaceum</i> (Schreb.) Darbysh.]–alfalfa (<i>Medicago sativa</i> L.) mixtures compared to N-fertilized tall fescue monoculture. The study comprised 10 treatments in randomized complete blocks with three replications: an alfalfa monoculture, three tall fescue–alfalfa mixtures (75:25, 50:50, and 25:75 seed ratios), and tall fescue monoculture fertilized with 0, 50, 100, 150, 200, and 300 kg N ha<sup>−1</sup> year<sup>−1</sup>. The 50:50 mixture achieved the greatest total annual forage accumulation and was the most profitable ($67 ha<sup>−1</sup> year<sup>−1</sup>). Despite 300 kg N ha<sup>−1</sup> year<sup>−1</sup>-fertilized tall fescue achieving the highest total forage accumulation among monocultures, it was unprofitable ($36 ha<sup>−1</sup> year<sup>−1</sup>). Tall fescue receiving 50–200 kg N ha<sup>−1</sup> year<sup>−1</sup> was profitable but less so than the mixtures and alfalfa monoculture. Over 10 years, the average annual forage nutritive value was highest for alfalfa monoculture, followed by the mixtures and N-fertilized tall fescue. Results indicate that the 50:50 mixture has great potential for long-term persistence, improved forage production, and profitability. We, therefore, recommend growers to consider cultivating 50:50 mixture under intensive management for successful forage production in the long term.</p>","PeriodicalId":7522,"journal":{"name":"Agronomy Journal","volume":"117 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agronomy Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/agj2.70124","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Concerns about forage crop productivity often focus on persistence. Research shows that binary grass–legume mixtures yield more than nitrogen (N)-fertilized grass monocultures. However, their long-term ability to sustain higher production and profits remains uncertain. To address this, a 10-year field study was conducted at the University of Wyoming James C. Hageman Sustainable Agriculture Research and Extension Center at Lingle, WY. The study evaluated forage accumulation, nutritive value, and profitability of tall fescue [Lolium arundinaceum (Schreb.) Darbysh.]–alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) mixtures compared to N-fertilized tall fescue monoculture. The study comprised 10 treatments in randomized complete blocks with three replications: an alfalfa monoculture, three tall fescue–alfalfa mixtures (75:25, 50:50, and 25:75 seed ratios), and tall fescue monoculture fertilized with 0, 50, 100, 150, 200, and 300 kg N ha−1 year−1. The 50:50 mixture achieved the greatest total annual forage accumulation and was the most profitable ($67 ha−1 year−1). Despite 300 kg N ha−1 year−1-fertilized tall fescue achieving the highest total forage accumulation among monocultures, it was unprofitable ($36 ha−1 year−1). Tall fescue receiving 50–200 kg N ha−1 year−1 was profitable but less so than the mixtures and alfalfa monoculture. Over 10 years, the average annual forage nutritive value was highest for alfalfa monoculture, followed by the mixtures and N-fertilized tall fescue. Results indicate that the 50:50 mixture has great potential for long-term persistence, improved forage production, and profitability. We, therefore, recommend growers to consider cultivating 50:50 mixture under intensive management for successful forage production in the long term.
对饲料作物产量的关注通常集中在持久性上。研究表明,二元草-豆科植物混合物比单施氮肥的草产量更高。然而,它们维持较高产量和利润的长期能力仍不确定。为了解决这个问题,怀俄明州林格尔市怀俄明大学詹姆斯·c·哈格曼可持续农业研究和推广中心进行了一项为期10年的实地研究。本研究评价了高羊茅(Lolium arundinaceum, Schreb.)的饲料积累、营养价值和盈利能力。Darbysh。[英文]紫花苜蓿(Medicago sativa L.)混合物与氮肥单栽培高羊茅的比较。该研究包括10个处理,随机完整块,3个重复:苜蓿单一栽培,3个高羊茅-苜蓿混合(75:25、50:50和25:75种子比例),高羊茅单一栽培,施肥0、50、100、150、200和300 kg N / h - 1年−1。50:50的混合获得了最大的年牧草积累总量,并且是最有利可图的($67 ha−1年−1)。尽管300 kg N /公顷−1年施肥的高羊茅在单一栽培中获得了最高的总饲料积累,但它是无利可图的(36公顷−1年−1美元)。高羊茅每隔50-200 kg N - 1年−1年可盈利,但低于混合栽培和苜蓿单一栽培。10年间,苜蓿单作的年平均饲料营养价值最高,混合作次之,施氮高羊茅次之。结果表明,50:50混合具有长期持续性、提高饲料产量和盈利能力的潜力。因此,我们建议种植者考虑在集约化管理下种植50:50的混合物,以获得长期成功的饲料生产。
期刊介绍:
After critical review and approval by the editorial board, AJ publishes articles reporting research findings in soil–plant relationships; crop science; soil science; biometry; crop, soil, pasture, and range management; crop, forage, and pasture production and utilization; turfgrass; agroclimatology; agronomic models; integrated pest management; integrated agricultural systems; and various aspects of entomology, weed science, animal science, plant pathology, and agricultural economics as applied to production agriculture.
Notes are published about apparatus, observations, and experimental techniques. Observations usually are limited to studies and reports of unrepeatable phenomena or other unique circumstances. Review and interpretation papers are also published, subject to standard review. Contributions to the Forum section deal with current agronomic issues and questions in brief, thought-provoking form. Such papers are reviewed by the editor in consultation with the editorial board.