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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kephart, K. D. Articles by Buxton, D. R. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Kephart, K. D. Articles by Buxton, D. R. Agricola Articles by Kephart, K. D. Articles by Buxton, D. R.

Forage Quality Responses of C₃ and C₄ Perennial Grasses to Shade

Plant Science Dep., South Dakota State Univ., Brookings, SD 57007
USDA-ARS, 1577 Agronomy Hall, Iowa State Univ., Ames, IA 50011

^* Corresponding author.

Both C₃ and C₄ grasses exhibit similar morphological responses to shade, but they differ in photosynthesis-related responses to shade, such as forage yield and growth rate. Morphological adaptation and reduced photosynthesis under shade may affect forage quality. The objective of this research was to determine the effect of adaptation to shade on forage quality of C₃ and C₄ grasses. The C₃ species were tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.), and deertongue grass (Panicum clandestinum L.); the C₄ species were switchgrass(Panicum virgatum Michx.) and big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii Vit.). Grasses were established near Ames, IA, and grown under shade cloths which allowed 37 and 70% of ambient sunlight (AS) to penetrate. In addition, the grasses were subjected to a nonshaded (100% AS) treatment. Leaf blades, nonlaminar herbage, and total herbage samples were obtained at approximately 21-d increments from late spring to early summer for 2 yr. Neutral-detergent fiber (NDF) concentration in leaf blades was 18% greater in C₄ species than in C₃ species. Otherwise, few clear differences were observed between C₃ and C₄ types. Compared with the 100% AS treatment, NDF concentration in the 37% AS treatment was reduced 2 to 3%, whereas N concentration was increased by about 31% in nonlaminar herbage. In vitro digestible dry matter was increased 3 to 5% by shade. Nitrogen content per unit leaf area was not affected by shade, suggesting that nitrogenous compounds were concentrated by thinning of leaves. Thus, stressful growth conditions that limit photosynthate, such as shade, may improve forage quality.

Received for publication August 31, 1992.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. L. Buergler, J. H. Fike, J. A. Burger, C. M. Feldhake, J. R. McKenna, and C. D. Teutsch Forage Nutritive Value in an Emulated Silvopasture Agron. J., September 5, 2006; 98(5): 1265 - 1273. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. M. Burner and C. T. MacKown Nitrogen Effects on Herbage Nitrogen Use and Nutritive Value in a Meadow and Loblolly Pine Alley Crop Sci., March 27, 2006; 46(3): 1149 - 1155. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. M. Burner and D. P. Belesky Diurnal Effects on Nutritive Value of Alley-Cropped Orchardgrass Herbage Crop Sci., September 1, 2004; 44(5): 1776 - 1780. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. E. Johnson, L. E. Sollenberger, I. F. Andrade, and J. M. Bennett Nutritive Value of Rhizoma Peanut Growing under Varying Levels of Artificial Shade Agron. J., September 1, 2002; 94(5): 1071 - 1077. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. D. Redfearn, D. R. Buxton, and T. E. Devine Sorghum Intercropping Effects on Yield, Morphology, and Quality of Forage Soybean Crop Sci., September 1, 1999; 39(5): 1380 - 1384. [Abstract] [Full Text]