2013 Plant Management Network.

Accepted for publication 17 December 2012. Published 21 January 2013.

Small Grains Have Forage Production Potential

and Nutritive Value in Central High Plains of
Wyoming
M. Anowarul Islam, Assistant Professor, Augustine K. Obour,
Research Scientist, Jerry J. Nachtman, Research Associate, and
Robert E. Baumgartner, Farm Manager, Department of Plant
Sciences, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071; and
Malay C. Saha, Associate Professor, The Samuel Roberts Noble
Foundation, 2510 Sam Noble Parkway, Ardmore, OK 73401
Corresponding author: M. Anowarul Islam. mislam@uwyo.edu
Islam, M. A., Obour, A. K., Saha, M. C., Nachtman, J. J., and Baumgartner, R. E. 2013.
Small grains have forage production potential and nutritive value in Central High Plains of
Wyoming. Online. Forage and Grazinglands doi:10.1094/FG-2013-0121-02-RS.

Abstract

Forage production and nutritive value of three selections each of winter rye
(Secale cereale L.), and triticale (X Triticosecale Wittmack), and four selections of
wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) were evaluated over three growing seasons (20082011) in Wyoming. Average fall forage productivity was < 1.0 Mg/ha and lower
(P < 0.0001) than forage production in spring and summer. Average spring dry
matter (DM) yield was 3.2 Mg/ha and greater than summer yield (2.0 to 2.6
Mg/ha) except in 2010-2011. Total seasonal forage production was not different
(P > 0.05) among rye and triticale selections except in 2009-2010. Total seasonal
forage DM production among triticale and wheat selections was not different in two
out of the three growing seasons. Forage crude protein (CP) of rye selections (127
to 196 g/kg) was consistently lower than triticale (151 to 208 g/kg) and wheat
(162 to 235 g/kg). Average in-vitro dry matter digestibility (IVDMD) of all small
grains was above 650 g/kg (679 to 863 g/kg). Acid detergent fiber (ADF) and
neutral detergent fiber (NDF) were different among small grain species (rye >
triticale > wheat). These results indicate that small grains can provide acceptable
forage yield with superior quality for feeding livestock during winter and early
spring in the central High Plains (CHP).

Introduction
Forage availability in fall and spring play a significant role in sustainability
and profitability of beef cattle operations in Wyoming and other neighboring
states in the CHP. Feeding cost represents > 50% of annual production cost in a
typical cow-calf operation system (17). Fall and early spring feeding is the most
expensive for beef cattle producers in Wyoming and other mountain states
because of limited forage availability for grazing during this period. Annualized
winter feeding in the Intermountain West costs $100 to $200 per cow (16).
There is an interest in using small grain crops as winter annual forages for
grazing or making hay in the United States Great Plains and Canada (1,11).
Managing small grains as a dual-purpose crop is more profitable than either
grain or forage only system (1,2,11). The practice, however, may not be feasible
in the CHP region where growing seasons are relatively short. Small grain crops
can be grown and harvested as an alternative hay or silage crop. In the northern
Great Plains region of Montana, North and South Dakota, small grains are
managed as annual forage hay crops (2). Elsewhere in the northern prairies of
Canada, small grains are grown as silage for feedlots and dairies (9). Hay
production represents a significant cash crop for Wyoming agriculture, with a
total cash receipt of $58 million in 2010 representing 26% of the total cash
receipts for all crops (22). Managing small grains for forage production will
increase winter and early spring feed availability options for livestock producers
while boosting the cash receipt of hay production systems in the state. Forage

Forage and Grazinglands

21 January 2013

yield potential, winter hardiness, and forage quality are some important
attributes to consider in selecting small grains to grow in the CHP region. In an
earlier study in Minnesota, Cherney and Marten (4) reported that barley
(Hordium valgare L.), oats, and triticale produced significantly greater forage
DM yield and higher quality forage than wheat. Similarly, McCormick et al. (15)
reported in Ohio that forage yield of 2.1 Mg/ha for monoculture winter rye, 1.4
Mg/ha for winter triticale, and 0.8 Mg/ha for wheat. In Nebraska, Lekgari et al.
(10) showed that triticale can produce acceptable hay with DM yield ranging
from 4.7 to 12.6 Mg/ha in low and higher precipitation environments,
respectively.
In Wyoming, beef cattle are allowed to graze on stalks of corn and stubble of
cereal crops in early fall (November), while during winter cattle eat stacked hay
harvested in the summer or graze on dormant pasture in areas of light and
drifted snow, all these feeds are low in quality. Therefore, protein
supplementation may be required to improve animal intake and performance
(6). Small grain forages have potential for beef cattle production in the CHP and
other western mountain states (3,13). There is limited information on seasonal
forage productivity and nutritive value of small grains in the CHP region of
Wyoming. The objectives of the research were to evaluate and compare fall,
spring, and summer forage production potential and nutritive value of elite
selections of rye, triticale, and winter wheat, and also to perform yield stability
analysis to identify which selection produces stable forage yields when grown
under Wyoming conditions.
Study Site and Methods
The study was conducted at the University of Wyoming James C. Hageman
Sustainable Agriculture Research and Extension Center (SAREC), Lingle, WY
(4214N, 10430W; 1272 m elevation) for three growing seasons: 2008-2009,
2009-2010, and 2010-2011. The CHP region is characterized by cool
temperatures and short growing seasons. Average frost-free period at SAREC is
about 125 days with average annual precipitation of 350 mm. More than 75% of
the annual precipitation falls during summer months. The soils are generally
loam and sandy loams with 1 to 2% organic matter (OM). The soil at the
experimental site is Haverson loam soil (fine-loamy, mixed, superactive,
calcareous, mesic Aridic Ustifluvents) with 1.2% OM, pH 8.0, phosphorus (P) 20
mg/kg, and potassium (K) 344 mg/kg.
Three selections each of rye (Bates RS4, Maton II, and Winter rye) and
triticale (NF96213, NF96210, and Presto) and four selections of wheat
(NF94120, NF95134A, Jagalene and Willow creek) were evaluated. The
sources of seeds were: the Noble Foundation (Bates RS4, Maton II, NF96213,
NF96210, NF94120, and NF95134A), Montana State University (Willow creek),
and local seed store (Winter rye, Presto, and Jagalene). Wheat cultivar Willow
creek was not included in the 2008-2009 evaluations because of unavailability
of seed. Winter rye, Presto, and Jagalene served as standard cultivar checks for
rye, triticale, and wheat, respectively. The treatments were arranged in a
randomized complete block design with three replicates. Before seeding in the
fall of each growing season, 56 kg N/ha as urea, 56 kg P/ha (as monoammonium phosphate), and 22 kg S/ha (as elemental sulfur) were broadcast
(based on soil test results) and disked into the soil during seedbed preparation.
Seedbed preparation was done by disking followed by starter fertilizer
application, chisel plowing, harrowing, and rolling using Landstar field
preparation equipment (Kuhn Krause Inc., Hutchinson, KS). The Landstar field
operation equipment consists of single gang of discs, chisel plow shanks, and
rolling spiders that allow for one pass field preparation, thus enhancing residue
accumulation on the soil surface.
Additional 56 kg N/ha and 22 kg S/ha were applied as top dress in early
spring (March of each growing season). No K fertilizer was applied due to high
soil test K concentration. Pre-plant fall fertilizer application occurred on 3
September, 3 September, and 23 August, for the 2008-2009, 2009-2010, and
2010-2011, respectively. Spring top dressing of N and S application dates were

Forage and Grazinglands

21 January 2013

16 March, 30 March, and 21 March for the 2008-2009, 2009-2010, and 20102011, respectively. Seeding rate was 120 kg pure live seeds/ha. The seeds were
planted using a cone planter with shank (shop built with Haybuster shanks)
with 35-cm row spacing and 2.5-cm planting depth. The individual plot size was
1.5 m 4.6 m and the study was conducted on the same plots over the three
growing seasons. Planting dates were 4 September, 8 September, and 2
September for 2008-2009, 2009-2010, and 2010-2011, respectively.
Forage Harvest and Analysis
Crops were harvested for DM yield and analyzed for forage nutritive value in
the falls of 2008 and 2010 (26 November 2008 and 1 December 2010); spring of
each year (11 May 2009, 26 May 2010, and 21 April 2011); and in the summer of
each year (16 June 2009, 19 July 2010, and 8 June 2011). Forage was usually
harvested whenever there was adequate harvestable herbage mass and this
varied each year depending on the amount of precipitation and inclement
weather conditions such as colder temperatures and heavy snow. Clippings were
carried out at 7.5-cm stubble height using a small plot forage harvester (Hege
212 forage plot harvester, Wintersteiger Inc., Salt Lake City, UT) mounted with a
scale to record harvested forage fresh weight. Sub-samples of harvested forage
were taken and dried at 60C for at least 48 h in a forced-air oven dryer to a
constant weight for DM determination. Oven-dried samples were ground to pass
through a 1-mm mesh screen in a Wiley mill (Model 4, Laboratory Mill, Thomas
Scientific, Swedesboro, NJ) and analyzed for forage nutritive value.
Crude protein, ADF, NDF, and IVDMD were determined using NearInfrared Reflectance Spectroscopy (NIRS; Foss InfraXact analyzer, Silver
Spring, MD). Reference wet chemistry analysis of selected forage samples were
used to develop NRIS calibration equations for the measured forage quality
parameters. Calibration samples for tissue N concentration were determined by
dry combustion using the Leco C/N analyzer (Leco Corp., St Joseph, MI). Crude
protein was calculated by multiplying the tissue N concentration by 6.25. Acid
detergent fiber and NDF calibration samples were replicated three times and
analyzed using the ANKOM fiber analyzer (ANKOM Technology Corp.,
Macedon, NY). Similarly, calibration samples for IVDMD were replicated three
times and analyzed following the two stage technique by Tilley and Terry (21) as
modified by Moore and Mott (18). The calibration equations for each forage
quality parameter were developed for each growing season using partial least
squares (20).
Data Analysis
Statistical analyses for ANOVA for all responses were done using the PROC
MIXED procedure of SAS. Small grain species, selections, harvest season (fall,
spring, and summer), and year were considered as fixed effects and replicates
and their interactions were considered as random effects. When year interaction
with treatments was significant, data were analyzed separately for each year as
split-plot design, with harvest season as whole plots and selections as sub-plots.
The LSMEANS procedure and associated PDIFF were used for mean
comparisons and single degree of freedom orthogonal contrasts were used to
compare small grains (rye, triticale, and wheat). Interaction and treatments
effects were considered significant when F test P values were < 0.05. Simple
regression analysis was used to perform yield stability analysis to identify which
small grain selection produced the most stable forage across the 3-year of the
study. This approach consisted of regression of the annual yield for each small
grain selection against the environmental mean yield, which was the average
yield of all small grain selections in a given year (19).
Climatic Data
The amounts of precipitation during the study period were greater than the
30-year average recorded in the region (Table 1). In general, > 70% of annual
precipitation in the experimental site occurred in March-August, with the

Forage and Grazinglands

21 January 2013

highest rainfall in May and June. The 2008-2009 growing season was relatively
drier compared to 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. Except the fall of 2009-2010,
monthly average temperatures were similar to 30-year average (Table 1).
Average December temperature in 2009-2010 was 4.5C below the 30-year
average temperature for the month.
Table 1. Monthly precipitation and average temperature at the University of
Wyoming James C. Hageman Sustainable Agriculture Research and Extension
Center (SAREC) near Lingle over the study period.
20082009
Month

20092010

20102011

30-year
avg (5)

20082009

Precipitation (mm)

20092010

20102011

30-year
avg

Temperature (C)

Sep

26

16

32

13.7

13.4

15.4

15.4

Oct

14

41

24

24

6.3

3.9

10.2

8.7

Nov

14

14

3.6

3.1

-0.1

1.1

Dec

11

-5.4

-7.7

-2.3

-3.2

Jan

12

-2.8

-3.6

-3.7

-3.9

Feb

23

14

10

0.2

-4.7

-4.6

-1.1

Mar

17

26

25

18

2.3

3.6

3.9

3.1

Apr

64

85

59

42

6.1

7.8

6.9

7.8

May

23

66

114

64

13.5

11.2

10.0

13.4

Jun

82

108

53

52

16.8

18.2

17.3

19.1

Jul

22

25

24

45

20.3

20.9

22.7

22.4

Aug

86

21

28

30

19.3

21.2

22.0

21.2

Avg

30

35

31

29

7.8

7.3

8.1

8.7

360

423

371

348

Total

Forage Dry Matter Yield

Forage DM yield in the fall, spring, and summer of the 2008-2009 growing
season was not significantly different among small grain species across
selections (Table 2). However, within each season (fall, spring, and summer),
there were significant differences in forage DM production within each species.
Forage production in fall were greater for Bates RS4 (rye), NF96210 (triticale),
NF96213 (triticale), NF94120 (wheat) and NF9513A (wheat) than other small
grain selections. Forage DM yields in the spring for Bates RS4 (rye), Maton II
(rye), and Jagalene (wheat) were superior to other small grain selections.
Summer forage DM production ranged from 1.0 Mg/ha for rye selection Maton
II to 3.0 Mg/ha wheat selection NF94120. Total forage DM production across
the three seasons was not different among the small grain selections (Table 2).
Due to > 7.0 inches of snow fall in late October and relatively colder
temperatures in the fall of 2009 (Table 1), there was no harvestable forage in the
fall of 2009-2010. Inclement weather conditions due to snowstorms and colder
temperatures have been reported to prevent fall wheat forage harvest in the CHP
(10). Forage production in the spring and summer of 2009-2010 were different
among species across selections (Table 2). Averaged across selections, spring
forage productivity of rye and triticale forage was similar and greater than forage
yield of wheat. Spring forage DM yield of Winter rye, Presto (triticale), and Bates
RS4 (rye) were greater than the other selections. In the summer, forage DM
yield of wheat was greater than both rye and triticale when averaged across
selections.
In the 2010-2011 growing season, average fall forage production between rye
and triticale were not different. However, DM yield differences between rye and
wheat (P = 0.004) and triticale and wheat (P = 0.04) were different. Forage DM

Forage and Grazinglands

21 January 2013

production in fall of 2010 ranged from 0.2 Mg/ha for NF95134A (wheat) to 0.7
Mg/ha for NF96120 (triticale). In spring of 2011, forage DM production was
different among small grain species. Averaged across selections, rye had the
greatest forage DM yield but DM yield of triticale and wheat were similar (Table
2). Triticale DM yield in the summer of 2011 was greater than both rye and
wheat (Table 2).
Total forage DM across the three seasons was similar among rye selections.
Similarly, DM yields of triticale selections NF96210 and NF96213 were greater
than standard check Presto. However, Jagalene wheat (check) produced the
highest forage DM yield among the wheat selections tested.
The observed forage DM yield data in this study are consistent with those
reported by McCormick et al. (15) and Brown and Almodares (1) who showed
that rye and triticale produced comparable but sometimes greater forage yield
than wheat. Total forage DM yield of triticale selections in the current study are
similar to reported yields of 4.7 to 7.9 Mg/ha in drier environments in the CHP
region (9). Dry matter yield of Willow creek (forage winter wheat released by
Montana State University) in this study was lower than those reported for
Montana and eastern Wyoming (3). Seasonal total DM yield of Willow creek
ranged from 2.9 to 5.1 Mg/ha, lower than DM yield of other small grains
evaluated in this study.
Overall, forage production in the fall was lower (< 1.0 Mg/ha) than spring
and summer for all tested small grains. In two of the three growing seasons,
spring forage production was >3.0 Mg/ha and greater than summer forage
production except in 2010-2011. The Noble Foundation selections had higher
fall forage potential than the check cultivars (e.g., Maton II had >2 fold and
Bates RS4 had >3 fold fall forage yield than the check cultivar Winter rye; Table
2). Triticale selection NF96210 produced the highest forage DM yield among all
the selections tested in this study.

Forage and Grazinglands

21 January 2013

Table 2. Forage dry matter yield of small grain selections over the three growing seasons at Lingle, WY.
Forage dry matter yield (Mg/ha)
2008-2009 growing season
Fall

Spring

Summer

2009-2010 growing season

Total

Fall

Spring

Summer

Total

Species

Selection

Rye

Bates RS4

1.0a#

3.6ab

1.4bc

6.0 a

3.6ab

2.7bc

6.3a

Maton II

0.7b

4.2a

1.0c

6.0a

2.8cd

2.4c

5.2b

Winter rye

0.0d

3.1bc

2.7ab

5.9a

4.1a

2.2cd

6.3a

NF96210

0.9ab

3.6ab

1.6b

6.0a

3.2bc

1.8d

4.9b

NF96213

1.1a

2.4cd

1.9b

5.4a

3.6ab

2.1cd

5.7ab

Presto

0.6bc

2.9bc

2.3ab

5.8a

4.0a

1.9d

5.9ab

NF94120

1.1a

2.0d

3.0a

6.2a

2.5cd

3.7a

6.3a

NF95134A

0.9ab

3.1bc

2.0b

6.0a

2.5cd

3.2ab

5.8ab

Jagalene

0.4c

4.1a

2.2ab

6.7a

2.1d

3.0b

5.1b

Willow

2.2d

2.9b

5.1b

Mean

0.7

3.3

2.0

6.0

3.1

2.6

5.7

S.E

0.1

0.5

0.5

0.7

0.3

0.4

0.5

Triticale

Wheat

Contrast

P>F

Rye vs. triticale

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

Rye vs. wheat

NS

NS

NS

NS

***

***

Triticale vs. wheat

NS

NS

NS

NS

***

***

NS

Forage dry matter yield (Mg/ha)

2010-2011 growing season
Fall

Spring

Summer

Total

Species

Selection

Rye

Bates RS4

0.6a

2.8a

4.3d

7.7bc

Maton II

0.6a

2.9a

5.1c

8.6ab

Winter rye

0.5ab

1.4b

6.3b

8.2ab

NF96210

0.7a

1.2b

7.7a

9.5a

NF96213

0.4b

1.3b

6.5ab

8.3ab

Presto

0.5b

1.1c

6.1bc

7.7bc

NF94120

0.5ab

1.0c

4.9cd

6.4c

NF95134A

0.2c

0.5c

4.1d

4.8d

Jagalene

0.4b

0.9c

5.2c

6.4c

Willow

0.6a

0.3d

2.0e

2.9e

Mean

0.5

1.3

5.2

7.1

S.E

0.9

0.1

0.8

0.8

Triticale

Wheat

Contrast

P>F

Rye vs. triticale

NS

***

**

NS

Rye vs. wheat

**

***

NS

**

NS

***

**

Triticale vs. wheat

# = Means followed by same letter(s) in a column are not significantly different at P 0.05.
NS = not significant; * = P 0.05; ** = P 0.01; *** = P 0.001;
SE = standard error for mean comparison. Data are average of three replicates.

Forage and Grazinglands

21 January 2013

Yield stability analysis showed that NF96210 had a regression coefficient (b)
> 1.0 (Table 3). The selection had below average yield stability and will better
adapt to superior environmental conditions (7). This possibly explains the
greater forage productivity of NF96210 when moisture levels were higher,
especially in 2010-2011 growing season. Rye selections, Maton II and Bates RS4,
had average yield stabilities (b = 1.0), whereas all the wheat selections tested in
this study had above average yield stabilities (b < 1.0; Table 3). Forage DM
yields of the small grains tested in this study were superior to average yields of
2.6 Mg/ha for dominant hay meadows grown in Wyoming (22).
Table 3. Simple linear regression of forage dry matter yield on environmental
mean yield (yield stability analysis) of small grain selections over 2008 to 2011
growing seasons.
Small grain selection

Intercept

Slope (b)

Bates RS4 (rye)

0.04 0.48#

1.04 0.12

0.90***

Maton II (rye)

0.34 0.37

0.96 0.10

0.92***

Winter rye (rye)

-0.23 0.30

1.15 0.08

0.96***

NF96210 (triticale)

-0.45 0.58

1.23 0.15

0.88***

NF96213 (triticale)

-0.21 0.39

1.09 0.09

0.93***

Presto (triticale)

-0.17 0.29

1.08 0.07

0.96***

NF94120 (wheat)

0.25 0.42

0.93 0.10

0.89***

NF95134A (wheat)

0.15 0.40

0.84 0.10

0.88***

-0.05 0.34

0.99 0.08

0.94***

0.55 0.88

0.47 0.20

0.51NS

Jagalene (wheat)
Willow (wheat)

# = Mean standard error; *** = P 0.001; NS = not significant.

Forage Nutritive Value

Crude protein concentrations during 2008-2009 were similar among
triticale and wheat selections (Table 4). Forage CP of rye selections was
consistently lower than triticale and wheat selections over the study period. Also
CP values of rye selections were lower than the mean CP for each growing
season. Mean CP values were 173, 164, and 207 g/kg in 2008-2009, 2009-2010,
and 2010-2011, respectively. In general, the CP ranking over the study period
was wheat > triticale > rye. The CP values are consistent with other studies
reported in the Great Plains region. Holman et al. (8) reported CP range of 126
to 260 g/kg for winter wheat forages in KS. Similarly, average CP of 86 g/kg was
reported for triticale selections evaluated in NE (10), which is lower than CP
values (127 to 235 g/kg) observed in this study. Forage CP below 62 g/kg has
been reported to be deficient for most ruminant livestock (12). The observed CP
values of all small grain selections evaluated in this study were in excess of the
maintenance requirement levels for cattle in most stages of production.
In-vitro dry matter digestibility in 2008-2009 was similar between triticale
and wheat selections but IVDMD concentrations of both triticale and wheat
selections were greater than rye (Table 4). Average IVDMD of wheat was greater
than rye (P = 0.0001) and triticale (P = 0.04) in both 2009-2010 and 2010-2011.
Mean IVDMD concentrations were 781, 763, and 835 g/kg in 2008-2009, 20092010, and 2010-2011, respectively. The IVDMD values are similar to those
reported by Cherney and Marten (4) but greater than the average IVDMD of
650 g/kg reported for triticale in the CHP (10). However, the IVDMD of wheat
in this study is similar to the average value of 800 g/kg indicated for wheat in
the CHP region (11). When IVDMD is considered as estimator for forage
digestibility, the IVDMD concentrations observed for all small grain selections
are greater than the total digestible nutrient requirements of beef cattle (12).

Forage and Grazinglands

21 January 2013

Table 4. Forage crude protein (CP), in-vitro dry matter digestibility (IVDMD), acid detergent fiber (ADF),
and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) of small grains over the study period.
Crude protein (g/kg)
2008-2009

2009-2010

IVDMD (g/kg)

2010-2011

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

Specie

Selection

Rye

Bates RS4

159 e#

127 f

194 c

738 d

686 c

807 c

Maton II

169 d

137 e

196 c

759 c

679 c

809 c

Winter rye

174 c

155 cd

193 c

744 d

700 c

812 c

NF96210

179 b

151 d

208 b

802 ab

756 b

840 ab

NF96213

168 d

170 b

205 b

791 b

799 a

843 ab

Presto

184 a

170 b

207 b

806 a

783 ab

831 b

NF94120

183 ab

188 a

209 b

805 a

826 a

840 ab

NF95134A

181 ab

169 bc

210 b

799 ab

785 ab

860 a

Jagalene

162 e

181 ab

211 b

782 b

811 a

863 a

Willow

194 a

235 a

809 a

849 ab

Mean

173

164

207

781

763

835

SE

2.0

7.0

3.0

7.0

22

15

Triticale

Wheat

Contrast

P>F

Rye vs. triticale

**

**

***

***

**

Rye vs. wheat

***

***

***

***

***

NS

**

NS

Triticale vs. wheat

Crude protein (g/kg)

2008-2009

2009-2010

IVDMD (g/kg)

2010-2011

2008-2009

ADF

2009-2010

2010-2011

NDF

Specie

Selection

Rye

Bates RS4

352 a

419 a

304 a

636 a

672 a

582 a

Maton II

345 ab

408 a

298 a

638 a

665 a

578 a

Winter rye

339 b

388 b

275 b

621 b

645 b

533 bc

NF96210

307 cd

313 c

271 b

610 c

601 c

549 b

NF96213

310 cd

302 cd

274 b

608 cd

599 cd

550 b

Presto

283 e

309 c

251 c

587 e

608 c

518 de

NF94120

296 ed

289 d

259 c

604 d

593 d

538 bc

NF95134A

303 d

292 d

253 c

608 cd

585 d

528 cd

Jagalene

279 e

280 d

236 d

567 f

572 e

503 e

Willow

306 c

243 d

593 d

514 de

Mean

312

331

266

609

613

539

SE

5.0

9.0

8.0

3.0

6.0

8.0

Triticale

Wheat

Contrast

P>F

Rye vs. triticale

***

***

***

***

***

**

Rye vs. wheat

***

***

***

***

***

***

Triticale vs. wheat

NS

**

NS

**

# = Means followed by same letter(s) in a column are not significantly different at P 0.05.
NS = not significant; * = P 0.05; ** = P 0.01; *** = P 0.001;
SE = standard error for mean comparison. Data are average across harvest seasons (since forage
nutritive value were similar in fall, spring and summer)

Forage and Grazinglands

21 January 2013

Forage ADF and NDF concentrations were lower for wheat and triticale
selections compared to rye (Table 4). Average ADF concentration ranged from
279 for wheat cultivar Jagalene to 352 g/kg for rye selection Bates RS4 in 20082009. These two selections had the lowest (Jagalene; 236 to 279 g/kg) and
highest (Bates RS4; 304 to 672 g/kg) ADF over the study period. Concentration
of NDF followed similar trends with the order of rye > triticale > wheat (Table
4). These results are similar to the findings of Lekgari et al. (10) who reported
average ADF and NDF values of 328 and 605 g/kg, respectively for triticale
cultivars in the CHP region. Similarly, Cherney and Marten (4) reported average
ADF values of 350 to 372 g/kg for forage wheat cultivars harvested at six
different maturity dates.
Winter wheat selection Willow creek consistently had the highest forage
nutritive value (CP, 194 to 235 g/kg; IVDMD, 809 to 849 g/kg; ADF, 243 to
306 g/kg; NDF, 514 to 593 g/kg). The nutritive value of the small grains tested
in this study were superior to spring grazed hay meadows (CP, 110 g/kg;
IVDMD, 708 g/kg; ADF, 357 g/kg; NDF, 632 g/kg) and baled hay meadows (CP,
90 g/kg; IVDMD, 573 to 580 g/kg; ADF, 407 to 436 g/kg; NDF, 556 to 732 g/kg)
fed to cattle in Wyoming (13,14). Therefore in Wyoming, where harvested hay is
fed to livestock until green grass from meadows and cool season grasses are
available, small grain forages can provide acceptable herbage mass with superior
quality for livestock during winter and early spring.
Conclusions
Forage DM production of small grains used in this study was lower in the fall
compared to spring and summer. Average fall forage production was < 1.0
Mg/ha in two of the three growing seasons. Spring forage production was > 3.0
Mg/ha and always greater than summer forage yield except in 2010-2011.
Seasonal forage production was similar for rye and triticale except in 20092010. Seasonal DM yields of triticale and wheat were not different in two of the
three growing seasons. Forage CP was in the order of wheat > triticale > rye.
Willow creek wheat had superior forage quality but least DM yield. Forage
nutritive value of selections tested in this study was above the minimum levels
required to maintain normal body condition of grazing livestock. Therefore,
small grains can provide acceptable forage DM with superior quality for feeding
livestock during winter and spring months in Wyoming.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Dr. Dennis Cash with Montana State University and the
Noble Foundation for providing small grain seeds.
Literature Cited

1. Brown, A. R., and Almodares, A. 1976. Quantity and quality of triticale forage
compared to other small grains. Agron. J. 68:264-266.
2. Carr, P. M., Horsley, R. D., and Poland, W. W. 2004. Barley, oat, and cereal-pea
mixtures as dryland forages in the northern Great Plains. Agron. J. 96:677-684.
3. Cash, S. D., Bruckner, P. L., Wichman, D. M., Kephart, K. D., Berg, J. E., Hybner, R.,
Hafla, A. N., Surber, L. M. M., Boss, D. L., Carlson, G. R., Eckoff, J. L., Stougaard,
R. N., Kushnak, G. D., and Riveland, N. R. 2009. Registration of "Willow Creek"
forage wheat. J. Plant Regist. 3:185-190.
4. Cherney, J. H., and Marten, G. C. 1982. Small grain crop forage potential: I.
biological and chemical determinants of quality, and yield. Crop Sci. 22:227-231.
5. Curtis, J., and Grimes, K. 2004. Wyoming climate atlas. Online. Water Resources
Data System, Univ. of Wyoming, Laramie, WY.
6. Fernandez-Rivera, S., and Klopfenstein, T. J. 1989. Diet composition and daily gain
of growing cattle grazing dryland and irrigated cornstalks at several stocking rates.
J. Anim. Sci. 67:590-596.
7. Finlay, K. W., and Wilkinson, G. N. 1963. The analysis of adaptation in a plantbreeding programme. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 14:742-54.
8. Holman, J. D., Thompson, C. R., Hale, R. L., and Schlegel, A. J. 2010. Forage yield
and nutritive value of hard red and hard white winter wheat. Agron. J. 102:759773.

Forage and Grazinglands

21 January 2013

9. Juskiw, P. E., Helm, J. H., and Salmon, D. F. 2000. Forage yield and quality for
monocrops and mixtures of small grain cereals. Crop Sci. 40:138-147.
10. Lekgari, K. A., Baenziger, S. P., Vogel, K. P., and Baltensperger, D. D. 2008.
Identifying winter forage triticale (Triticosecale Wittmack) strains for the central
Great Plains. Crop Sci. 48:2040-2048.
11. Lyon, D. J., Baltensperger, D. D., and Siles, M. 2001. Wheat grain and forage yields
are affected by planting and harvest dates in the central Great Plains. Crop Sci.
41:488-492.
12. National Research Council. 1996. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle, 7th Edn.
Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.
13. Nayigihugu, V., Schleicher, A. D., Hess, B. W., Koch, D. W., Flake, J. W., and Held,
L. J. 2006. Production and quality of forage and economics of grazing a hay
meadow the spring. Prof. Anim. Sci. 22:318-324.
14. Nayigihugu, V., Schleicher, A. D., Koch, D. W., Held, L. J., Flake, J. W., and Hess, B.
W. 2007. Beef cattle production, nutritional quality, and economics of windrowed
forage vs. baled hay during winter. Agron. J. 99:944-951.
15. McCormick, J. S., Sulc, R. M., Barker, D. J., and Beuerlein, J. E. 2006. Yield and
nutritive value of autumn-seeded winter-hardy and winter-sensitive annual
forages. Crop Sci. 46:1981-1989.
16. Merrill, M. L., Bohnert, D. W., Ganskopp, D. C., Johnson, D. D., and Falck, S. J.
2008. Effects of early weaning on cow performance, grazing behavior, and winter
feed costs in the intermountain west. Prof. Anim. Sci. 24:29-34.
17. Miller, A. J., Faulkner, D. B., Knipe, R. K., Strohbehn, D. R., Parrett, D. F., and
Berger, L. L. 2001. Critical control points for profitability in the cow-calf
enterprise. Prof. Anim. Sci. 17:295-302.
18. Moore, J. E., and Mott, G. O. 1974. Recovery of residual organic matter from in
vitro digestion of forages. J. Dairy Sci. 57:1258-1259.
19. Raun, W. R., Barreto, H. J., and Westerman, R. L. 1993. Use of stability analysis for
long-term soil fertility experiments. Agron. J. 85:159-167.
20. Shenk, J. S., and Westerhaus, M. O. 1991. Population definition, sample selection,
and calibration procedures for near infrared reflectance spectroscopy. Crop Sci.
31:469-474.
21. Tilley, J. M. A., and Terry, R. A. 1963. A two stage technique for in vitro digestion of
forage crops. J. Br. Grassl. Soc. 18:104-111.
22. Wyoming Department of Agriculture (WYDA). 2011. Wyoming Agricultural
Statistics Service, Cheyenne, WY.

Forage and Grazinglands

21 January 2013