Researchers evaluate popular forage grain blends

Kurt Braunwart with Progene Plant Research, of Othello, has grown several combinations of commercially available forage oats and triticale, under research trial conditions, in order to identify compatible cultivars. Submitted photo.

Growers who plant forage grain blends now have data to back their seed selection decisions.

As the planting of annual grain blends for forage production increases in the Northwest, so does the need to rethink how we select the seed for our blends.

Steve Fransen, Washington State University forage agronomist, sees most blend selections made by growers and seed outlets as less than scientific.

“More often, the motivation behind seed selection is cost or availability,” he said. “Even those looking for something more out of a blend are usually just hoping and guessing.”

Fransen fails to see the logic behind such an approach.

“A farmer’s lowest cost input item is his seed. At the same time, it is literally the foundation of any production system,” he said. “Why someone would gamble hard work and expense on an unknown is beyond me.”

One group of seed specialists is trying to change how growers and suppliers select for their forage annual blends by providing them with the research-based data they need to make informed decisions. Over the last three years, Connell Grain Growers (CHS), working with Progene Plant Research (PPR), of Othello, has grown several combinations of commercially available forage oats and triticale, under research trial conditions, in order to identify compatible cultivars.

“From just looking at the plots, the difference between mixes was really noticeable,” Dave Beach, of Connell Grain Growers, said. “Some obviously weren’t meant to grow together and others were.”

Best blends identified

Beach recalls one combination in particular, Everleaf Oat 126 and Merlin Triticale, as performing exceptionally well as a blend.

“They are both real strong varieties in their own right,” Beach said. “But they seemed to always keep up with each other. Neither appeared dominant.”

One aspect of compatibility clearly evident to Beach was how well Everleaf 126 Oat and the Merlin Triticale shared a common space so both plants could benefit from maximum levels of sunlight. He said each variety filled in any gaps left by the other so next to no light penetrated the interwoven leaves to the ground below.

“What we learned from the two years of data was the EverLeaf 126 oat-Trical Merlin triticale blend was visibly compatible and the others were not,” Kurt Braunwart, of PPR, said. “Both years, the 126-Merlin blend had the best quality (protein) of any blend and better quality than either 126 oats or Merlin triticale by themselves.”

Braunwart said the data also showed the test plot with that blend did produce less overall tonnage than the test plots representing each of its components individually, but that discrepancy may be due to timing rather than an inherent production weakness in the 126-Merlin blend.

“There is evidence in the data suggesting harvesting the blend three days later may have produced best quality with best yield,” Braunwart said. “This is what we will be checking in our 2010 research trial.”

Research long overdue

For Fransen, this sort of research is necessary if forage producers hope to optimize their production and reduce his financial risks.

“Once we know exactly how individual varieties and genotypes perform, we can start putting them together in a systematic way,” he said. “Otherwise, the grower is playing a guessing game.”

Fransen cautions there is risk in mixing cultivars without knowing ahead of time if the agronomic components of each grain are compatible with the others in the blend.

He said the wrong combination of plants can turn what could be a win-win into a lose-lose.

“For instance, if you are planning to cut a stand for hay or silage, you want all the cultivars in your blend to advance in maturity at the same rate,” Fransen said. “So when you harvest, all plants are close to the same stage of development at the same time.”

Fransen said when grains in a blend have widely differing rates of maturity, a grower is forced to choose between compromised production on one cultivar by harvesting it before its yield potential is fully realized or quality on the other cultivar by harvesting later when its nutritional value is already declining.

Either way, the grower loses, he said.

Other problems that arise from poor blend choices can range from a competitiveness imbalance within the mix to visual appeal issues in the stand.

Special blends for special jobs

For those blends that are backed by solid research, Fransen sees two particularly relevant forage production applications.

“Many times, individual varieties in a blend will grow at different rates,” he said. “Some will germinate and develop rapidly while others will hold back for a growth spurt later in the season.”

Fransen said these blend characteristics have already been used successfully to manipulate and often extend the growing season on forage stands.

Another application of blends that shows a great deal of promise is the positive role they can play in nutrient uptake and nutritional balancing. This is particularly relevant to dairy operators who are not only charged with producing forage for their cows but also for managing the nutrient rich manure their animals produce.

“If you look at the nutrient status tables on grains or annual legumes, you will see each plant has a different concentration of nutrients in its stems and leaves,” he said.

By blending the appropriate cultivars, it is possible not only to fine tune the nutritional balance of the forage being fed to cows but also to balance the level of nutrients being extracted from the manure-applied fields.

Short URL: http://basinfarmer.com/?p=638

Posted by admin on Mar 3 2010. Filed under Ag Briefs, Irrigation. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry