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

This Article Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Sanderson, M. A. Articles by Kujawski, J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Sanderson, M. A. Articles by Kujawski, J. Agricola Articles by Sanderson, M. A. Articles by Kujawski, J. Related Collections Forage Management Other Forage Crops

FORAGE & GRAZING LANDS

Eastern Bottlebrush Grass Yield, Persistence, and Nutritive Value in the Northeastern USA

^a USDA-ARS Pasture Systems and Watershed Management Research Unit, Bldg. 3702, Curtin Road, University Park, PA 16802-3702
^b USDA-NRCS Plant Materials Center, Big Flats, NY 14830
^c Usda-Nrcs

^* Corresponding author (mas44{at}psu.edu)

Introduced (nonnative) species account for nearly all of the forage grasses used in northeastern USA forage systems. We evaluated accessions of the native cool-season species, Eastern bottlebrush grass (Elymus hystrix var. hystrix L.), from the northeastern USA for yield, persistence, plant morphological traits, and nutritive value. Thirteen accessions and one commercial ecotype of bottlebrush grass were transplanted into single-row field plots in late summer of 2000 at Beltsville, MD, Rock Springs, PA, and Big Flats, NY. Two orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.) cultivars were included for reference. Yield, persistence, morphology (leaf width, length, mass, area, and tillers per plant), and nutritive value data were collected during 2001 and 2002. Bottlebrush grass was eliminated by the bluegrass billbug (Sphenophorus parvulus Gyllenhal) at Rock Springs in spring of 2001. At Big Flats and Beltsville, the bottlebrush grass accessions produced as much dry matter per plant as the commercial ecotype. Orchardgrass yielded four times as much dry matter as the mean of all bottlebrush grass entries (102 g vs. 26 g per plant averaged for years and locations). The low productivity of bottlebrush grass resulted from reduced tillering especially during regrowth. There was very little regrowth of bottlebrush grass during late summer in all environments. Survival of bottlebrush grass was 36% during 3 yr vs. 84% for orchardgrass. Differences in nutritive value among accessions were due mainly to differences in leaf-to-stem mass ratio. Eastern bottlebrush grass has limited potential for use as a forage grass in the northeastern USA.

Abbreviations: CP, crude protein • dNDF, digestible neutral detergent fiber • IVTD, in vitro true digestibility • LSR, leaf-to-stem mass ratio • NDF, neutral detergent fiber • SLA, specific leaf area