HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fribourg, H. A. Articles by Reich, V. H. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Fribourg, H. A. Articles by Reich, V. H. Agricola Articles by Fribourg, H. A. Articles by Reich, V. H.

Yields of Warm- and Cool-Season Forages on Adjacent Soils¹

Knowledge of average yields that can be expected over a period of years for a soil mapping unit helps in the use of soil survey information. Even the most recent soil surveys must rely on estimates from experiments and experience. For yields of principal crops these estimates are adjusted for the effects of soil-water relationships and often must be extrapolated to similar soils for which no data are available. The objective of this study was to determine the yield on adjacent soils varying primarily in their moisture-supplying capacity and natural drainage, of adapted perennial and annual warm and cool-season forages and small grains grown under the same general climatic influence and management.

The yields of 12 forage crops that grow mostly from spring to autumn were measured for 5 years on five adjacent soils with similar aspect. Later, eight winter small grain cultivars were grown for hay and grain for 3 and 4 years, respectively, on the same sites. The soils used belong to the Eutrochrepts, Hapludults, Paleudults, Fragiudults, and Ochraquults great groups.

The soils were characterized in terms of their yield for each crop, ranging from 1,035 to 5,735 kg/ha for the warm-season crops and from 2,225 to 6,760 kg/ha dry matter for the cool-season forages. Since the many forage crops adapted to the landscape studied have different periods of growth and can satisfy different animal nutritional needs in different forage systems, no attempt was made to compare species within each soil studied. However, the data presented will help in soil selection for crops needed within specific forage systems on the landscape.

Key Words: Soil productivity • Eutrochrepts • Hapludults • Paleudults • Fragiudults • Ochraquults • Trifolium repens L. • Trifolium pratense L. • Phleum pratense L. • Festuca arundinacea Schreb. • Dactylis glomerata L. • Lotus corniculatus L. • Medicago sativa L. • Lespedeza cuneata (Dum.) G. Don • Lespedeza striata (Thunb.) H. & A. • Lespedeza stipulacea Maxim. • Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. • Hordeum vulgare L. • Secale cereale L. • Triticum aestivum L. em Thell. • Avena sativa L.

² Professor, graduate research assistant, and associate professor.

Received for publication October 8, 1981.