Crop Science Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published in Crop Sci 12:831-833 (1972)
© 1972 Crop Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stuthman, D. D.
Right arrow Articles by Marten, G. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Stuthman, D. D.
Right arrow Articles by Marten, G. C.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Stuthman, D. D.
Right arrow Articles by Marten, G. C.

Genetic Variation in Yield and Quality of Oat Forage1

D. D. Stuthman and G. C. Marten2

We evaluated 30 cultivars of oats (Avena sativa L.) for forage quality and yield at heading and 10 days later in 1968. Quality traits measured included in vitro digestible dry matter (IVDDM), cell wall constituents (CWC), acid detergent fiber (ADF), acid detergent lignin (ADL), and crude protein (CP) concentration. Eleven of the cultivars were tested for 2 additional years.

All three fiber components (CWC, ADF, and ADL) were positively correlated with each other and all were negatively correlated with IVDDM. Of the three, however, ADL was most closely associated with digestibility. Yield and quality were negatively correlated at heading, but independent 2 weeks later. Forage yield and grain yield were not associated. Forage yield was correlated with plant height and heading date.

Cultivars differed in oat forage quality within a given environment; differences, however, generally were not repeatable over years. In contrast, cultivar variation for forage yield was consistent over years and sufficient for effective selection. Therefore, we recommend primary emphasis on forage yield in the developmnt of superior forage oat cultivars. However, one should examine forage quality before making final selections.

Key Words: In vitro digesibility • Fiber components • Cell wall constituents • Acid detergent fiber • Acid detergent lignin • Crude protein


1 Paper no. 7951, Scientific Journal Series, Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station and Plant Science Research Division, ARS, USDA.

2 Associate Professor and Research Agronomist, respectively. PSRD, ARS, USDA, in Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minn. 55101.

Received for publication May 13, 1972.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Crop Sci.Home page
F. E. Contreras-Govea and K. A. Albrecht
Forage Production and Nutritive Value of Oat in Autumn and Early Summer
Crop Sci., October 2, 2006; 46(6): 2382 - 2386.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Journal of
Environmental Quality
Copyright © 1972 by the Crop Science Society of America.