Crop Science
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online 22 January 2007
Published in Crop Sci 47:168-173 (2007)
© 2007 Crop Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
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 Rao, S. C.
Right arrow Articles by Mayeux, H. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Rao, S. C.
Right arrow Articles by Mayeux, H. S.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Rao, S. C.
Right arrow Articles by Mayeux, H. S.
Related Collections
Right arrow Other Legumes
Right arrow Grazing Management
Right arrow Other Forage Crops

Interseeding Novel Cool-Season Annual Legumes to Improve Bermudagrass Paddocks

S. C. Rao*, B. K. Northup, W. A. Phillips and H. S. Mayeux

USDA-ARS, Grazinglands Research Lab., 7207 W. Cheyenne St., El Reno, OK 73036


Figure 1
View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 1. Days after seeding by treatment interactions in (A) grass, (B) legume, and (C) total standing crop produced by bermudagrass plots; vertical bars noted at points represent one standard error.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 2. Days after seeding by treatment interactions in N concentration of (A) grass, (B) legume, and (C) total forage produced by bermudagrass plots; vertical bars represent one standard error, and columns with the same letter were not significantly different (P > 0.05).

 

Figure 3
View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 3. Days after seeding by treatment interactions in IVDDM (in vitro digestible dry matter) of (A) grass, (B) legume, and (C) total forage produced by bermudagrass plots. Vertical bars noted at points represent one standard error, and columns with the same letter were not significantly different (P > 0.05).

 

Figure 4
View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 4. Mean treatment responses of (A) standing crop, (B) N concentration, and (C) in vitro digestible dry matter (IVDDM) of forage produced by bermudagrass plots to treatments; vertical bars represent one standard error and dashed horizontal lines are effects of the control treatment (0 kg ha–1 N).

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2007 by the Crop Science Society of America.