<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>New Prairie Press</title>
<copyright>Copyright (c) 2019 Kansas State University Libraries All rights reserved.</copyright>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org</link>
<description>Recent documents in New Prairie Press</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2019 03:26:28 PDT</lastBuildDate>
<ttl>3600</ttl>


	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	

	
		
	




<item>
<title>Southeast Research and Extension Center Agricultural Research 2019</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/23</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/23</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:41:07 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Report on agricultural research performed at Southeast Research and Extension Center.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>L. W. Lomas</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Acknowledgments</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/22</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/22</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:40:55 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>We thank the following individuals, organizations, and firms that contributed to this year’s research programs through financial support, product donations, or services.</p>

	]]>
</description>


</item>




<item>
<title>Annual Summary of Weather Data for Parsons - 2018</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/21</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/21</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:40:43 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Annual summary of weather data for Parsons, Kansas, 2018.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>M. Knapp</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Changes in Soil Microbiology Under Conventional and No-Till Production During Crop Rotation</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/20</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/20</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:40:25 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Soil microbial activity is important for crop production. Soil microbes are involved in nutrient and water cycling within the soil, and interact with crop plants to provide the basic nutrient and water resources needed for crop production. Claypan soils have unique physical characteristics that impact soil biology. This study explored the tempo­ral changes in soil microbiology in a claypan soil under conventional and no-till produc­tion during a crop rotation of corn/winter wheat/soybean/fallow commonly planted in southeast Kansas. We found soil microbial activity changed more in the top two inches of soil than in the lower soil layers. Wheat resulted in higher soil microbial activity and biomass than corn. Soybeans had a more stable microbial activity in the soil than either corn or wheat. The no-till plots had greater microbial biomass and activity than conventionally tilled systems, and the temporal changes in soil microbial properties were more apparent in no-till plots. These results offer an interesting insight into the soil biological properties that impact soil health for crop production.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>C. J. Hsiao et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Characterization of Claypan Soils in Southeastern Kansas</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/19</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/19</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:40:06 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Soil erosion reduces topsoil depth. In areas with a claypan, removal of productive topsoil reduces crop yield where the claypan layer is near the surface. The topsoil and claypan layer each have unique characteristics that impact crop production and within-field variability. To better understand these differences, the soil from an area of low crop yield and high crop yield were collected and laboratory tests were performed to determine the soil classification and undrained shear strength. Understanding the soil properties and the interaction between the topsoil and claypan layers may aid in under­standing the process by which topsoil is being eroded.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>M. A. Mathis II et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Biomass Production of Single Species Cover Crop</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/18</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/18</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:39:49 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Cover crops can benefit agricultural production by improving soil health and productivity, reducing weeds, and providing biomass for grazing. In this one-year study, biomass production was measured in 17 different single species summer cover crops and a fallow control. Overall, grass species produced more biomass than brassicas, with legumes, broadleaves, and fallow yielding intermediate amounts of biomass. Within the grass species, pearl millet, brown midrib (BMR) sorghum, and sorghum sudan produced more biomass than proso millet; German millet and browntop millet had intermediate biomass production. Within the brassicas, both brown and yellow mustards produced more biomass than collards. There was no difference in biomass production within the broadleaf species or the legume species tested. Plots that produced higher amounts of biomass also had fewer weeds, indicating the potential for cover crops to reduce weed growth and establishment. The cost of biomass production varied widely between the cover crops, with the broadleaf and grass species being the least expensive. Choice of a cover crop depends on the goals. Based on cost, weed suppression, and grazing potential, the most suitable cover crops identified in this study were pearl millet, BMR sorghum, sorghum sudan, German millet, okra, and cowpea.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>G. F. Sassenrath et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Using Cover Crops as an Effective Weed Control Method in Southeast Kansas</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/17</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/17</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2019 16:39:30 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Weed control is important to optimize crop production. This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of different methods of fall-implemented weed control strategies. These strategies included different cover crop mixes, chemical control, and mechanical control. The cover crop mixes included four different commonly-planted winter cover crops. The chemical control was a fall-applied burndown, and the me­chanical control was vertical tillage. We found cover crop mixes that contained cereal rye provided the most weed control, with the chemical control being a close second. Spring oats die during the winter because of the low temperatures. The three cover crop mixes containing spring oats still provided 50% reduction in weed biomass the follow­ing spring. However, the fall tillage increased the amount of weed biomass.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>L. I. Chism et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Modeling Wheat Susceptibility to Disease</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/16</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/16</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:33:17 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Fusarium Head Blight (FHB) or head scab is a disease caused by the soil-borne<em> Fusarium</em> fungus. The disease occurs frequently in southeast Kansas and can result in reduc­tions in wheat yield and quality because of the mycotoxins developed by the fungus. Timely application of fungicides during the heading period of wheat is one option to reduce the fungus and control the infection rate. This study reports our research on use of fungicides to control head scab and improve wheat yield. We developed a model to predict wheat heading date. Accurate knowledge of wheat stage is the first step in developing a good production management tool for timely application of fungicide for disease control.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>H. Zhao et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Corn Planting Date and Depth – Impacts on Yield</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/15</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/15</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:33:03 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Corn growth and production is dependent on environmental conditions during the growing season. Optimal corn growth occurs between 50 and 86°F. Early-season soil temperatures may reduce corn emergence. Conversely, later-planted corn may not have adequate moisture for good pollination and grain production. This research tested the impact of planting date and planting depth on corn yield. The yield decreased with later planting dates. Earlier planting dates had better yield at lower planting depths, but yield was reduced at deeper planting depths at later planting.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>G. F. Sassenrath et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Controlling Soil-Borne Disease in Soybean With a Mustard Cover Crop</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/14</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/14</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:32:49 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Charcoal rot is a soil-borne disease that is prevalent in southeast Kansas. The disease infects multiple crops, including soybean, and causes yield reductions. A high-gluco­sinolate mustard with biofumigant properties reduced the population levels in soil and in soybean plants of the fungus (<em>Macrophomina phaseolina</em>) that causes charcoal rot. In this study, management practices that incorporate use of mustard as a cover crop in soybean production systems were tested. Results indicate that tillage increases the char­coal rot fungus. The mustard cover crop was tested in field studies for its impact on soil health, fungal disease and propagules, and soybean growth and yield.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>G. F. Sassenrath et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Southeast Kansas Crop Production Summary – 2018</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/13</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/13</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:32:31 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>This is a summary of the crop production conditions in southeast Kansas in 2018, and the results of the variety testing for corn, soybean, sorghum, sunflower, and wheat.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>G. F. Sassenrath et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Use of a Fungicide to Reduce Stomatal Conductance for Production of Sweet Corn Planted at Different Populations with Limited Irrigation</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/12</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/12</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:32:19 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Sweet corn in 2018 was affected by irrigation, plant population, and a fungicide applied for stomatal control. Even though measured stomatal conductance was unaffected and no disease pressure was noted, applying fungicide at V6 more than doubled the number of harvested ears per acre and per plant, but an additional application at R1 did not increase harvested ears. Applying 1 inch of irrigation at the VT growth stage resulted in approximately 20% greater number of harvested ears per acre and ears per plant, but did not increase fresh weight. Under these dry conditions, increasing plant population tended to decrease harvested ears per acre and ears per plant, especially when no fungi­cide was applied or with no irrigation.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>D. W. Sweeney et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Response of Soybean Grown on a Claypan Soil in Southeastern Kansas to the Residual of Different Plant Nutrient Sources and Tillage</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/11</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/11</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:32:07 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>The residual from previous high-rate turkey litter applications, which were based on nitrogen (N) requirements of the previous grain sorghum crop, increased 2018 soybean yield more than that obtained from the residual of phosphorus (P)-based turkey litter applications (low rate), commercial fertilizer, or the control. Even though early soybean growth was sporadically affected by residual treatments, the dry matter production at the R6 growth stage tended to be where the N-based litter was applied.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>D. W. Sweeney et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Pre-Plant Nitrogen Rate and Application Method and Side-Dress Nitrogen Rate Effects on Corn Grown No-Till on a Claypan Soil</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/10</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/10</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:31:55 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Corn yield in 2018 was increased by about 5 bu/a with knife application of pre-plant nitrogen (N) fertilizer compared with broadcast application. Fertilizing with increasing rates of N applied pre-plant, at side-dress, or both had little effect on yield or yield components of corn in 2018.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>D. W. Sweeney et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Tillage and Nitrogen Placement Effects on Yields in a Short-Season Corn/Wheat/Double-Crop Soybean Rotation</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/9</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/9</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:31:44 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>In 2018, adding nitrogen (N) greatly improved average wheat yields with about a 10% increase with knife compared to broadcast application methods. Even though tillage did not affect wheat yields, soybean yield was about 10% greater with no-till.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>D. W. Sweeney et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Nitrogen Fertilizer Timing and Phosphorus and Potassium Fertilization Rates for Established Endophyte-Free Tall Fescue</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/8</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/8</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2019 15:31:31 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>A tall fescue production study was conducted at two locations, beginning in the fall of 2016 and the fall of 2017. At both sites, phosphorus (P) fertilization rate only affected the spring harvest, with few differences in yield. Applying nitrogen (N) in late fall or late winter resulted in greater spring yields than applying N in spring or not applying N. However, at Site 1 in 2017 fall harvest yields were greater from the spring N applica­tion, but this response was less at Site 2 in 2018. In both years, applying N increased tall fescue yield, but at Site 2 the yield differences from N timings were greater.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>D. W. Sweeney et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Evaluating Single and Multi-Species Summer Cover Crops for Biomass Yield</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/7</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/7</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:57:20 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Cover crops have multiple benefits to integrated agricultural production systems. How­ever, information is needed on best species and mixes to use. In this one-year study, the single species grass cover crops produced the most biomass. Spring forage peas did not perform well as a summer cover crop, yielding the same biomass as the fallow areas. Adding collards to the mixtures generally reduced total biomass production compared to single species of grasses alone. Total biomass production was affected by the number of plants in the mixture. Yields of grass-only plots were ~868 lb of dry matter (DM) per acre more than cover crop mixtures composed of two or three plant species. Plots with cover crop mixes yielded on average 1,348 lb DM/acre more than single species plots with legumes or collards. Grasses composed the greatest proportion of the total biomass (> 77% of total DM biomass was from grass species in mixtures).</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>J. K. Farney et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Cattle Preference for Annual Forages</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/6</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/6</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:57:09 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Many plant species that are available to use as cover crops also have potential as for­age for cattle. With this array of options it can be daunting to decide which plants to establish to meet goals as either a cover crop, forage, or for both. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify the annual forages fed to cattle in the fall, winter, or sum­mer that cattle preferred. To summarize, grasses were the most highly preferred forage for cattle regardless of grazing period. Low glucosinolate brassicas such as ‘Graza’ forage radish was the most highly preferred brassica that was offered. Selection by cattle of legume and broadleaf plant species was variable, and was primarily driven by other less-preferred plants that were offered.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>J. K. Farney</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Effects of Supplementation with Corn or Dried Distillers Grains on Gains of Heifer Calves Grazing Smooth Bromegrass Pastures</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/5</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/5</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:56:58 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>A total of 150 heifer calves grazing smooth bromegrass pastures were used to compare supplementation with 0.5% of body weight per head daily of corn or dried distillers grains (DDG) in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. Daily gains of heifers supplement­ed with corn or DDG were similar (P > 0.05) in all years except 2018, when heifers supplemented with DDG had greater (P < 0.05) gains than those supplemented with corn.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>L. W. Lomas et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Evaluation of Supplemental Energy Source for Grazing Stocker Cattle</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/4</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/4</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:56:47 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>A total of 180 steers grazing smooth bromegrass pastures were used to evaluate the effects of supplemental energy source on available forage, grazing gains, subsequent finishing gains, and carcass characteristics in 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. Supple­mentation treatments evaluated were: no supplement, a supplement with starch as the primary source of energy, and a supplement with fat as the primary source of energy. Supplements were formulated to provide the same quantity of protein and energy per head daily. Supplementation with the starch-based or fat-based supplement during the grazing phase resulted in higher (P < 0.05) grazing gains than feeding no supplement during all five years. In 2014, 2016, 2017, and 2018, grazing gains of steers supple­mented with the starch-based or fat-based supplement were similar (P > 0.05). In 2015, steers supplemented with the fat-based supplement had greater (P < 0.05) grazing gains than those that received the starch-based supplement. In 2014, supplementation during the grazing phase had no effect (P > 0.05) on finishing gain, feed intake, and feed:gain. Steers supplemented with the starch-based supplement had greater (P < 0.05) final finishing live weight, and greater (P < 0.05) hot carcass weight than those that received no supplement. In 2015, steers fed the fat-based supplement had higher (P < 0.05) final finishing live weight, greater (P < 0.05) hot carcass weight, and lower (P < 0.05) finishing gain than those supplemented with the starch-based supplement or fed no supplement. In 2016, steers fed the starch-based or fat-based supplement had greater (P < 0.05) hot carcass weight and higher (P < 0.05) marbling scores than those fed no supplement. Supplementation had no effect (P > 0.05) on finishing gains. In 2017, steers fed the starch-based supplement had greater (P < 0.05) finishing gain and lower (P < 0.05) feed:gain than those fed no supplement, and steers that were supplemented while grazing had greater (P < 0.05) hot carcass weight than those that received no supplement.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>L. W. Lomas et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Effects of Various Grazing Systems on Grazing and Subsequent Finishing Performance</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/3</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/3</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:56:34 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>A total of 360 mixed black yearling steers were used to compare grazing and subsequent finishing performance from pastures with ‘MaxQ’ tall fescue, a wheat-bermudagrass double-crop system, or a wheat-crabgrass double-crop system in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. Daily gains of steers that grazed MaxQ fescue, wheat-bermudagrass, or wheat-crabgrass were similar (P > 0.05) in 2010, 2016, 2017, and 2018. Daily gains of steers that grazed wheat-bermudagrass or wheat-crabgrass were greater (P > 0.05) than those that grazed MaxQ fescue in 2011 and 2012. Daily gains of steers that grazed wheat-crabgrass were greater (P > 0.05) than those that grazed wheat-bermudagrass and similar (P > 0.05) to those that grazed MaxQ fescue in 2013. Daily gains of steers that grazed wheat-crabgrass were greater (P > 0.05) than those that grazed wheat-bermudagrass or MaxQ fescue in 2014. In 2015, daily gains of steers that grazed wheat-crabgrass were greater (P < 0.05) than those that grazed wheat-bermudagrass or MaxQ fescue and daily gain of steers grazing wheat-bermudagrass was greater (P < 0.05) than that of those that grazed MaxQ fescue. Finishing gains were similar (P > 0.05) among forage systems in 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2016. Finishing gains of steers that grazed MaxQ fescue were greater (P < 0.05) than those that grazed wheatbermudagrass in 2011 and greater (P < 0.05) than those that grazed wheat-bermudagrass or wheat-crabgrass in 2015. In 2017, finishing gains of steers that grazed wheatcrabgrass were greater (P < 0.05) than those that grazed MaxQ fescue.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>L. W. Lomas et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Including Legumes in Wheat-Bermudagrass Pastures</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/2</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/2</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:56:22 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>Use of legumes in wheat-bermudagrass pastures did not affect summer cow gains in 2018. Forage availability was greater (P < 0.05) where nitrogen (N) alone was used than where crimson clover and ladino clover were used in the Legume system. Estimated for­age crude protein (CP) was similar (P > 0.05) for the Legume and Nitrogen systems.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>L. W. Lomas et al.</author>


</item>




<item>
<title>Effects of Interseeding Ladino Clover into Tall Fescue Pastures of Varying Endophyte Status on Grazing and Subsequent Finishing Performance of Stocker Steers</title>
<link>https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/1</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://newprairiepress.org/kaesrr/vol5/iss2/1</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 22:56:10 PDT</pubDate>
<description>
	<![CDATA[
	<p>One hundred ninety-two yearling steers grazing tall fescue pastures were used to evalu­ate the effects of fescue cultivar and interseeding ladino clover on available forage, grazing gains, and subsequent finishing performance in 2016, 2017, and 2018. Fescue cultivars evaluated were high-endophyte ‘Kentucky 31,’ low-endophyte Kentucky 31, ‘HM4,’ and ‘MaxQ.’ In 2016 and 2018, steers that grazed pastures of low-endophyte Kentucky 31, HM4, or MaxQ gained significantly more (P < 0.05) and produced more (P < 0.05) gain/a than those that grazed high-endophyte Kentucky 31 pastures. Gains of cattle that grazed low-endophyte Kentucky 31, HM4, or MaxQ were similar (P > 0.05). In 2017, steer gains were similar (P > 0.05) among all cultivars. High-endo­phyte Kentucky 31 pastures had more (P < 0.05) available forage than low-endophyte Kentucky 31, HM4, or MaxQ pastures during both 2016 and 2017. Steer gains and gain/acre were similar (P > 0.05) between pastures fertilized with nitrogen (N) in the spring and those interseeded with ladino clover during all three years. Fescue cultivar or legume treatment had little effect on finishing performance or carcass characteristics of steers grazed in 2016 or 2017. Steers that grazed high-endophyte Kentucky 31 in 2016 had lower (P < 0.05) final finishing weight and lower (P < 0.05) carcass weight than those that grazed low-endophyte Kentucky 31, HM4, or MaxQ. In 2017, steers that grazed pastures interseeded with ladino clover had lower (P < 0.05) finishing gains and greater (P < 0.05) feed:gain than those that grazed pastures with no legume.</p>

	]]>
</description>

<author>L. W. Lomas et al.</author>


</item>





</channel>
</rss>
