Forage potential of intercropping barley with faba bean, lupin, or field pea

Agronomy Journal

Volumn 100, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 182-190

  Strydhorst, Sheri M ^a   King, Jane R ^a   Lopetinsky, Ken J ^b   Harker, K Neil ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b Alberta Agric and Food   (Canada)

^c LACOMBE RESEARCH CENTRE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; GRAIN (AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT); GROWTH KINETICS; NUTRIENTS;

FORAGE POTENTIAL; INTERCROPPING;

CROPS;

ARABELLA; HORDEUM; HORDEUM VULGARE SUBSP. VULGARE; LUPINUS ANGUSTIFOLIUS; PISUM SATIVUM; VICIA FABA;

EID: 38349175102     PISSN: 00021962     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2134/agronj2007.0197     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Aasen, A., V.S. Baron, G.W. Clayton, A.C. Dick, and D.H. McCartney. 2004. Swath grazing potential of spring cereals, field pea and mixtures with other species. Can. J. Plant Sci. 84:1051-1058.
2. Alberta Agriculture and Food. 2001. Using 1000 kernel weight for calculating seeding rates and harvest losses. Prepared by M. McLelland and N. Miller. (Agdex 100/22-1). Available at www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/ deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex81 [assessed 20 Feb. 2007; revised 27 Aug. 2007; verified 31 Oct. 2007]. Alberta Agriculture and Food, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
3. Alberta Agriculture and Food. 2004. What is my cereal silage crop worth? Frequently asked questions. Prepared by D. Robinson. Available at www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/faq8432 [assessed 9 May 2007; revised 26 July 2006; verified 31 Oct. 2007]. Alberta Agriculture and Food, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
4. Alberta Agriculture and Food. 2006. Statistics and data development unit. Alberta 2006 Greenfeed and Silage Production Survey Results. Available at www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/sdd6003/$file/ ForageProduction.pdf?OpenElement [posted 12 Feb. 2007; assessed 9 May 2007; verified 31 Oct. 2007]. Alberta Agriculture and Food, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
5. Albrecht, K.A., and M.H. Hall. 1995. Hay and silage management, p. 155-162. In R.F. Barnes et al. (ed.) Forages: Volume 1: An introduction to grassland agriculture. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames.
6. Altieri, M.A. 1995. Agroecology: The science of sustainable agriculture. 2nd ed. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
7. Anil, L., J. Park, R.H. Phipps, and F.A. Miller. 1998. Temperate intercropping of cereals for forage: A review of the potential for growth and utilization with particular reference to the UK. Grass Forage Sci. 53:301-317.
8. Azo, W.M., G.P.F. Lane, W.P. Davies, and N.D. Cannon. 2006. Influences of crop maturity and harvest date on the yield and forage quality of lupin and lupin/cereal bi-crops for organic livestock production. p. 57-58. In Proc. 8th British Grassland Soc. Res. Meeting, Cirencester, England. 5-8 Sept. 2006. The British Grassland Soc., Cirencester, England.
9. Baron, V.S., H.G. Najda, D.F. Salmon, and A.C. Dick. 1992. Postflowering forage potential of spring and winter cereal mixtures. Can. J. Plant Sci. 72:137-145.
10. Berkenkamp, B., and J. Meeres. 1987. Mixtures of annual crops for forage in central Alberta. Can. J. Plant Sci. 67:175-183.
11. Caballero, R., E.L. Goicoechea, and P.J. Hernaiz. 1995. Forage yields and quality of common vetch and oat sown at varying seeding ratios and seeding rates of vetch. Field Crops Res. 41:135-140.
12. Carr, P.M., R.D. Horsley, and W.W. Poland. 2004. Barley, oat, and cereal-pea mixtures as dryland forages in the northern great plains. Agron. J. 96:677-684.
13. Carr, P.M., C.B. Martin, J.S. Caton, and W.W. Poland. 1998. Forage and nitrogen yield of barley-pea and oat-pea intercrops. Agron. J. 90:79-84.
14. Carruthers, K., B. Prithiviraj, Q. Fe, D. Cloutier, R.C. Martin, and D.L. Smith. 2000. Intercropping of corn with soybean, lupin and forages: Silage yield and quality. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 185:177-185.
15. Chapko, L.B., M.A. Brinkman, and K.A. Albrecht. 1991. Oat, oat-pea, barley, and barley-pea for forage yield, forage quality, and alfalfa establishment. J. Prod. Agric. 4:486-491.
16. Crews, T.E., and M.B. Peoples. 2004. Legume versus fertilizer sources of nitrogen: Ecological tradeoffs and human needs. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 102:279-297.
17. Eaglesham, A.R.J., A. Ayanaba, V. Ranga Rao, and D.L. Eskew. 1981. Improving the nitrogen nutrition of maize by intercropping with cowpea. Soil Biol. Biochem. 13:169-171.
18. Fraser, M.D., R. Fychan, and R. Jones. 2001. The effect of harvest date and inoculation on the yield, fermentation characteristics and feeding value of forage pea and field bean silages. Grass Forage Sci. 56:218-230.
19. Fraser, M.D., R. Fychan, and R. Jones. 2005. Comparative yield and chemical composition of two varieties of narrow-leafed lupin (Lupinus angustifolius) when harvested as whole-crop, moist grain and dry grain. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 120:43-50.
20. Ghanbari-Bonjar, A., and H.C. Lee. 2003. Intercropped wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and bean (Vicia faba L.) as a whole-crop forage: Effect of harvest time on forage yield and quality. Grass Forage Sci. 58:28-36.
21. Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., P. Ambus, and E.S. Jensen. 2003. The comparison of nitrogen use and leaching in sole cropped versus intercropped pea and barley. Nutr. Cycling Agroecosyst. 65:289-300.
22. Izaurralde, R.C, N.G. Juma, and W.B. McGill. 1990. Plant and nitrogen yield of barley-field pea intercrop in cryoboreal-subhumid central Alberta. Agron. J. 82:295-301.
23. Jedel, P.E., and J.H. Helm. 1993. Forage potential of pulse-cereal mixtures in Central Alberta. Can. J. Plant Sci. 73:437-444.
24. Jedel, P.E., and D.F. Salmon. 1994. Forage potential of Wapiti triticale mixtures in central Alberta. Can. J. Plant Sci. 74:515-519.
25. Juskiw, P.E., J.H. Helm, and D.F. Salmon. 2000. Forage yield and quality for monocrops and mixtures of small grain cereals. Crop Sci. 40:138-147.
26. Komarek, A. R. 1993. A filter bag procedure for improving efficiency of fiber analysis. J. Dairy Sci. 76(Suppl. 1):250.
27. Komarek, A.R., J.B. Robertson, and P.J. Van Soest. 1994. A comparison of methods for determining ADF using the filter bag technique versus conventional filtration. J. Dairy Sci. 77(Suppl. 1):114.
28. Littell, R.C., C.A. Milliken, W.W. Stroup, R.D. Wolfinger, and O. Schabenberger. 2006. SAS® for mixed models. 2nd ed. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC.
29. McKenzie, D.B., and D. Spaner. 1999. White lupin: An alternative to pea in oat-legume forage mixtures grown in Newfoundland. Can. J. Plant Sci. 79:43-47.
30. Mustafa, A.F., and P. Seguin. 2004. Chemical composition and in vitro digestibility of whole-crop pea and pea - cereal mixtute silages gtown in south-western Quebec. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 190:416-421.
31. O'Donovan, J.T., K.N. Harker, C.W. Clayton, J.C. Newman, D. Robinson, and L. M. Hall. 2001. Barley seeding rate influences the effects of variable herbicide rates on wild oat. Weed Sci. 49:746-754.
32. Rohweder, D.A., R.F. Barner, and N. Jorgensen. 1978. Proposed hay grading standards based on laboratory analyses for evaluating quality. J. Anim. Sci. 47:747-759.
33. SAS Institute. 2003. Release 9.1. SAS Inst., Caty, NC.
34. Van Soest, P.J. 1964. Symposium on nutririon and forages and pastures: New chemical procedures for evaluating forages. J. Anim. Sci. 23:838-845.
35. Vasilas, B.L., and C.E. Ham. 1985. Intercropping nodulating and non-nodulating soybeans: Effects on seed characteristics and dinitrogen fixation estimates. Soil Biol. Biochem. 17:581-582.
36. Vest, G. 1971. Nitrogen increases in a non-nodulating soybean genotype grown with nodulating genotypes. Agron. J. 63:356-359.
37. Waldo, D.R., and N.A. Jorgensen. 1981. Forages for high animal production: Nutritional factors and effects of conservation. J. Dairy Sci. 64:1207-1229.
38. Walton, P.D. 1975. Annual forages seeding rates and mixtures for central Alberta. Can. J. Plant Sci. 55:987-993.
39. Willey, R.W, 1979a. Intercropping- its importance and research needs. Part I - Competition and yield advantages. Field Crop Abstr. 32:1-10.
40. Willey, R.W. 1979b. Intercropping - its importance and research needs. Part II - Agronomy and research approaches. Field Crop Abstr. 32:73-82.