TURAL EXPERIMENT STATION TEXAS AGRICUL . TEXAS R. D. LEWIS. DIRECTOR. COLLEGE STATION u w. la .. . . . . . E“! , . .‘ . if. ‘ n wfik“, >.. a . . 1.. .. _ ~ . , » . . 4, . . . . \.\.. T . f». . .1 .. Y. .,, _ . »,...._i . :53 dhi. {Jwimi “m; ¢¢A2..%%_uv.l .1 .. 3.‘, .1 \_...$».LI a», 2, . _ , a“? H a . .,. . , . , .., ‘.. nfl, 4.1.1:‘, u ., f wifb‘. _.\ .J£-., T\”¢?¢ ‘ xi. ejwwujfi c as; fi .¢ u. w, .. aw» . .,i. ‘ law w M. Rx, .. \._ , ~ .‘ ,. . .. \ , > . 1 n Q l ‘ I . ~ ..n. _ l. . . _ SUMMARY" Small grains produce good yields of high quality forage at a season of the year when green gr I limited. Forage production generally is more dependable and yields higher than for any other crop V for winter pasture. Acreages of small grains grown for forage exceed that of any other winter grazing Clipping management studies have shown that forage yields may be reduced 20 to 80 percent by, and frequent pasturing or clipping. Top growth is reduced and crown and root development are re Allowing the plant to become well established, 6 to 8 inches high, before grazing begins is particular portant if maximum yields are to be obtained. However, some sacrifice of total production may be sary or desirable to utilize some forage during critical fall and early winter periods. I Growth studies with oats have shown a direct relationship of growth to temperature. Winter t atures generally are mild enough south of College Station for continuous growth, but north of this growth stoppages are likely to occur with cold periods. Thus, the management program should all residual or accumulated growth for use during such periods. Otherwise, overgrazing may result in y, to the stands. Growth also is related to rainfall or available moisture during the growing season. ently about 20 inches of rainfall from September through April is adequate in most areas. Seasons wii than 20 inches of rainfall occur frequently in most of the areas; therefore, moisture frequently may be‘ iting factor. Excessive rainfall for maximum growth may occur, especially in the coastal area. A A number of varieties, especially of oats, are adapted for forage production. These include M ~ New Nortex, Alamo and Victorgrain oats and Cordova barley in North and Central Texas; and t‘ barley and Camellia oats along with Mustang, New Nortex, Alamo and Victorgrain oats in the Gulf I area and South Texas. Abruzzi rye is adapted in the Norteast Texas area, and Bronco oats is adapt late production for hay or silage. Several new varieties, including Gator and Elbon rye and Mid-Sou ' show promise for both early and sustained production. Further testing of these varieties is underway. varieties may be used satisfactorily, but the ones named have given the most consistent performance. Small grain varieties differ in growth habit, some producing maximum forage in the fall and oth i _ ing the spring. Mixtures of early and late types have been studied, both as seed mixtures and cross-s ‘- Mixtures of spring and winter-type oats have not produced more than either type in pure stands. With - management, production with these variety mixtures may be improved slightly over pure stands, but {g sults have not been consistently better. Cross-seedings also have shown no yield advantage, but they » improve footing for grazing animals under wet conditions. Legumes interplanted with small grains are used to some extent. This practice has improved. only slightly, but it may increase the protein content of the forage. These studies have not included u soil benefits resulting from the use of legumes in mixtures with small grains. ‘ Seeding rates from 48 and 112 pounds per acre appear to have little influence on total forage p tion. Early production is favored to some extent by the heavier seeding rates; for this reason, seeding. of 64 to 80 pounds per acre are suggested. z ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Information included in this bulletin has been supplied by personnel of the Texas Agricultural iment Station at a number of locations. These individuals are Lucas Reyes, Jr. agronomist, Substation g Beeville; M. E. Riewe, assistant agronomist, Substation No. 3, Angleton; R. M. Weihing, agronomist, ‘ ARS, Substation No. 4, Beaumont; E. D. Cook, agronomist, Substation No. 5, Temple; D. I. Dudley, 5 intendent, Substation No. 6, Denton; H. C. Hutson, superintendent, Substation No. ll, Nacogdoches; 1 Smith, assistant professor, Substation No. 18, Prairie View; B. A. Perry, superintendent, and C. S. Hov formerly assistant agronomist, Substation No. 19, Crystal City; R. Wood, superintendent, Substatio, 22, Kirbyville; M. Norris, associate agronomist, Substation No. 23, McGregor; Mark Buckingh || merly in charge, and A. Lancaster, in charge, Dairy Investigations Laboratory, Mount Pleasant. Seed for many of the studies were supplied by I. M. Atkins, in charge of small grain research, t-i ment of Agronomy, College Station, and by small grain breeders. I l-GRAINS are suited to many H» one of the main ones be- ge for livestock.- The aver- ual seeded acreage of small i Texas is estimated to ex- ll00,000. Of this acreage, an 1,200,000 are sown for _ pasture and are grazed ithe winter and spring until fge is exhausted and the L5 led out. A considerable _ of the remaining acreage in during the winter, then i- tock are removed in time re a grain crop. dition to grazing, some acre- irticularly of oats, are used , silage or as soiling crops. 7- percentage of the acreage v Texas and on the Coast ' is seeded exclusively for *_ than in the other Texas j Oats and rye are the prin- fall grain crops in East Tex- i and barley on the Coast . and Rio Grande Plain and and oats in Central and exas. ‘ small grains produce high forage at a season when Ethan B. Holt, Professor Department of Agronomy green forage is limited. The small grains generally are more reliable for forage production and produce a larger volume of forage than most winter growing crops. reasons, the acreage of small grains used for winter pasture exceeds that of any other winter crop. Be- cause the cost of land preparation, fertilization, seed, seeding and other factors make winter forage from small grains expensive, it is important to use adapted varieties and follow good cultural and man- agement practices to obtain high yields and efficient production. The results of studies of a num- ber of factors influencing forage production are reported in this bulletin. MANAGEMENT Grazing, clipping or other har- vest of small grains used for forage should strive for maximum sus- tained forage production without damage t0 stands of the crop.‘ The management system should be eco- nomical and practical, taking into consideration total production and l. EFFECT OF CLIPPING ON THE FORAGE PRODUCTION OF MUSTANG i OATS AND GOLIAD BARLEY, CRYSTAL CITY. 1956-57 Yield in Percent Height at Number of overbdr reduction which clipped. CH in s rams o}, in yield inches pp g giomge due to clipping i MUSTANG OATS _use 3 to 4 7 83 8 to l0 5 15 63 14 to 16 2 40 3 to 4 9 414 75 8 to 1D 5 669 59 14 to. 16 3 1637 _ GOLIAD BARLEY fuse 3 to 4 8 6 76 8 to 10 5 15 40 14 to 16 3 25 g to l: 11 518 51 to 6 958 10 14 to 16 4 1061 For these Small Brains tor Forage the time and distribution of the forage produced, whether for pas- ture or silage. Greenhouse and field clipping studies on Goliad barley and Mus- tang oats were carried out at Crys- tal City to determine the import- ance of stage of growth at first clipping and frequency of clipping on small grain forage yields. These results are presented in Table 1. Under both field and greenhouse conditions, it was found that oats produced more than twice as much total forage for the season when allowed to grow to a height of l4 to 16 inches than when clipped as soon as they reached 3 to 4 inches or 8 to l0 inches in height. Clip- ping at 3 to 4 inches was more det- rimental than clipping at 8 to l0 inches. Oat yields were reduced more than those of barley. Under field conditions, barley yields with 8 to 10-inch clippings were l0 per- cent less than when clipped at l4 to 16 inches high, while the yields for Mustang oats were reduced 59 CONTENTS Summary ______________________________ __ 2 Acknowledgments ________________ __ 2 Introduction ________________________ __ 3 Management ________________________ __ 3 Growth Behavior __________________ __ 6 Response to Management. 6 Response to Temperature. 7 Response to Moisture ...... .- 8 Variety Performance ............. .. 9 East Texas Timberlands.. l0 Central Texas ____________________ __ ll Rio Grande Plain ............ _. l2 Coast Prairie ...................... .. 12 Variety Mixtures .................. .. l3 Small Grain — Legume Mixtures .......................... _- l4 Seeding Rates and Methods- 15 percent with the same treatment. The effects of clipping were more severe in the greenhouse than un- der field conditions. Clipping ef- fects probably are more severe than normal livestock grazing because clipping removes all the forage at one time. TABLE 2. FORAGE YIELD, POUNDS PER ACRE, OF ALAMO AND MUSTANG OATS CLIPPED AT TWO STAGES OF GROWTH, COLLEGE STATION, 1954-55 Season of harvest‘ variety flllll-lfiglhitnglles Early winter Mid-winter Early spring Total Alamo 4-6 540 350 430 1320 10-12 1200 850 910 2960 Mustang 4-6 430 550 800 1780 10-12 770 1160 1450 3380 ‘Dates of clipping: EARLY WINTER—4 to 6 inches—Nov. 18, Dec. 1, Dec. 17, Ian. 3; 10 to 12 inches—Ian. 3. MID-WINTER—4 to 6 inches—Ian. 20, Feb. 9, Feb. 24,‘ 10 to 12 inches—Feb. 24. EARLY SPRING—4 to 6 inches—Mar. '7, April 15; l0 to 12 inches—Mar. 7, April 15; 10 to 12 inches—Apri1 15. Figure 1. Station, February 1957. Figure 2. Mid-winter growth at College Station of Mustang oats (center), a Growth oi oat varieties in clipping management study. College winter-type variety, and Alamo oats (left), a spring-type variety. A previous greenhouse stu the same location had shown the yield of Arkwin oats w,‘ duced 83 percent when the w, were clipped each time they r ed a height of 3 to 4 inches. i‘ ping the plants one time at 4 inches higlfj followed by clipping at 10 to 12 inches ref growth 20 percent, as com; with regular clipping at l0 t inches. In these studies, the best o»: velopment on oats and barle curred when they attained a h of 14 to 16 inches before clip; Plants clipped at 3 to 4 i y showed poor root development ‘i those at 8 to 10 inches showed ll‘ erate development. This points the importance of allowing s grains to become well establish before turning livestock on t for pasture. ’ Studies carried out at Col‘; Station, Table 2, further ems size the importance of proper c’ agement of small grains used winter pasture. Alamo and tang oats, clipped each time forage reached a height of 4 t inches, produced only 1,320 .1 1,780 pounds of forage, respecti 1y. These two varieties produ 2,960 and 3,380 pounds of fori respectively, or twice as m f when clipped each time the pla attained a height of 10 to 12 inc N Figure 1 shows the growth of pla in this clipping study. f; h The plants in this study h reached a height of 4 to 6 inc on November l3 and did not rea ' a height of 10 to 12 inches un January 3, or 6 weeks later. ' grower must decide whether production during this period .; more important than greater to production for the season. H00 ever, the value of allowing y“ plants to become well establish before grazing starts is evident a if frequent close utilization reduc production by as much as l! pounds per acre, the value of cluction at this level may be tionable. V parative performance of .4 arieties in the early part on is important. Alamo t-growing oat which usu- Juces early forage, while is a winter-type which strate in the early part ason and produces rela- tle forage during this per- "re 2. When clipping was ; until the plants attained it of l0 to 12 inches, the ter production of Alamo yined. When clipping was __at 4 to 6 inches height, produced little more early an Mustang. Thus, early it clipping or grazing of a fype variety could eliminate yield advantage. es were initiated at College in 1955-56 to determine the ce of clipping practices on A d. crown development as i. forage production. Alamo iustang oats were clipped at gland 40-day intervals and at 'ty. Supplemental irrigation “d to prevent growth stop- g 0m drouth and to permit a frequency of clipping. Air- rage produced with these nts is shown in Table 3. By “ber 20, a greater tonnage of fitter was produced on plants . biped to that time (40-day in- g than on plots that had been i... two or four times. Clip- a 10-day interval reduced 4 production 48 percent when ': ed with the 40-day clipping, a percent when compared fclipping’ only at maturity. reduction in Mustang yield ito frequent clipping was A y less than for Alamo. wn and root development measured frequently and fol- l? the same pattern as top pro- _'~~ Average root and crown ts at the end of the growing y are given yin: Table 4. Ap- ‘tly, more frequent clipping ed tillering and resulted in a _ r crown which would be ex- t to reduce top growth. 'ns from the most frequently ‘d plots weighed only 37 per- as much as those from plots clipped at 40-day intervals. Ap- proximately half of the above- ground development was in the crowns so that it was below the mower blade cutting height. Root production in the top foot of soil was reduced by frequent clipping, but to a lesser extent than top and crown development. Roots from frequently clipped plots weighed 30 percent less than roots from 40-day clipping. Root pro- duction was poor this particular season, which may account for the poor growth obtained in this study. A study in 1956-57 using Mus- tang oats demonstrates the value of delaying the first clipping or graz- ing, Table 5. The study was de- signed to be sampled at l0, 20, 30 and 40-day intervals. Owing to in- clement weather, the first clipping was delayed until January 4. Be- cause the plants had become well established, the reduction in yield due to frequent clipping was less than in previous years. Plots clip- per at 10-day intervals produced only 77 percent as much forage as those clipped at 40-day intervals. The highest production was ob- tained with the 20-day clipping interval. Two sets of plots were establish- ed in 1957, one of which was to be unclipped and the other clipped at TABLE 3. FORAGE PRODUCTION OF ALAMO AND MUSTANG OATS WITH VARI- OUS CLIPPING FREQUENCIES, COLLEGE STATION. 1955-56 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre Harvest - Nov. 10 Dec. 20 Feb. 1 Mar. 14 , varlew fregzzgcy‘ to to to to Total Dec. 20 Feb. 1 Mar. 14 May 3 Alamo 10 220 350 290 100 960 20 420 780 630 200 2030 40 390 790 620 240 2040 Maturity 2550 2550 Variety average 340 640 510 770 1890 Mustang 10 210 450 490 130 1280 20 230 560 680 310 1780 40 320 680 960 340 2300 Maturity 2370 2370 Variety average 250 560 710 770 1930 TABLE 4. TOP AND ROOT GROWTH OF ALAMO AND MUSTANG OATS WITH VARIOUS CLIPPING FREQUENCIES, LUFKIN FINE SANDY LOAM SOIL, COLLEGE STATION, 1955-56 _ Harvest Pounds of air-dry forage per acre Variety frequency, days Forage Crowns Roots Alamo 10 1060 490 390 20 2030 810 465 40 2040 1140 540 Maturity 2550 2720 640 Mustang 10 1280 760 500 20 1780 1600 595 40 2300 2190 710 Maturity 2370 3170 810 TABLE 5. FORAGE YIELD OF MUSTANG OATS CLIPPED AT FOUR FREQUEN- CIES, COLLEGE STATION, 1956-57 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre C1’ ' “Q2211? Nov. 1 Ian. 4 Feb. 2s days to to to Total Ian. 4‘ Feb. 25 Apr. 18 10 920 890 850 2660 20 870 1290 1600 3760 30 910 920 1270 3100 40 740 1960 760 3460 ‘First clipping on all plots. regular intervals. Ilue to incle- ment weather, clipping was delay- ed until late in January when more than 2,000 pounds of forage had been produced. Total cumulative growth with the two treatments is shown in Figure 8. These results indicate that utilization may be de- layed too long, especially if all the top growth is to be removed and if regrowth is expected. As indi- cated in most of these studies, max- imum total production is obtained with a single harvest at the end of the growing season. Reduction in root development _from frequent clipping could re- sult in reduced ability of the plant to take up moisture and nutrients. This would cause it to suffer from drouth earlier than it would with extensive root development. Re- duced crown development reduces the area from which growth takes place and leaves more of the soil exposed to evaporation and water loss from run-off. All of these fac- tors and others are important in developing a grazing management program. The available data indi- cate the desirability of delaying Tons of dry forage per acre N 1 l l l l the first grazing until Hthe plants are well established and practic- ing rotation grazing with at least 3 to 4 weeks between grazing per- iods. GROWTH BEHAVIOR The growth of small grain varie- ties depends on soil and air tem- peratures and soil moisture and nutrients. Varieties may differ in their response to temperature, man- agement practices and other envi- ronmental factors. In establishing a forage program, it would be val- uable to know the minimum and maximum temperatures at which small grains stop growth and whether varieties respond alike to these conditions. Should growth stop below certain minimum tem- peratures, then accumulated growth must be depended on for grazing during such periods. Response to Management The growth behavior pattern of three oat varieties was studied at College Station and Iowa Park for 2 years. The varieties, Alamo, Mus- tang and an experimental line 119- Plots uncllppod. ‘ ; 1 n l 4 ti". tans v2 ms V30 zn-a 2/21 an: 3/21 4/I0 4/24 5/6 Dates ‘ Figure 3. Average cumulative growth of Alamo, Mustang and 119-50-8 oats on Lutkin fine sandy loam. College Station, 1957-58. 50-8, (Tennex x Victoriaf Banner, C-I-6944) , differ in‘; habit and cold-hardiness. is an upright non-winter riety; Mustang has a t.‘ growth habit in early is winter-hardy; 119-50-8 is in growth habit and o.‘ winter-hardyf The varieti seeded in 12-inch rows and for above-ground growth at? intervals. Since the plants moved at the ground le i data presented in the figu follow include the weight ofl and are higher than norm, obtained in clipping studi age harvesting was imposed i set of plots at College Statio ter and fertilizer were app, levels to prevent them fro limiting factors in plant ;, A continuous record of air ature was made. The soil t ature recorder used in 1956- ed to function properly temperature records were i tained. Accumulated growth on; harvested three times duri_ growing season is presented ure 4. With all above-groun harvested, the rate of gro the three varieties is very s Their growth habit norm different, Mustang being p if in early season, and it wou be expected that the yields, be equal using normal ha 7 procedures. However, wh' above-ground growth is me‘ the three varieties produce f the same until the first date i vest. Alamo failed to recov produce as much after thi“ clipping. After the second, ping, it dropped even furt _ low the other two varieties. f1 All three varieties were sl’, their recovery following ea it ping. As much as 4 to 5 wee required for recovery and '; preciable growth. During th? iod, there was some shoot ;\ but little change in total weight. _ Apparently food y; in the crown were being tr red to develop new shoot resulting in little change in 3| of above-ground dry e first clipping in 1957- ‘, 3, was delayed until jan- iand recovery was never a following that date. ults indicate that clip- be delayed too long as "ng too frequent, and the “ay be much the same. _ults also show that a period than is normally '3 between grazings would ble. _ = . to Temperature dy the growth response of ,4 temperature, plots were ‘gich were unclipped _ut the season. Growth to i;- was determined by samp- jlnclipped 2-foot section of gerage accumulative growth ree varietiees by weekly or periods is shown in Fig- ._-It is apparent from these t growth is more uniform ge Station than at Iowa is is to be expected since temperatures at College Sta- g more suitable for contin- “rwth. The only major break A th at College Station dur- 6-57 came in March. The Stature dropped below freez- ji a short period, imparing and evidently producing 10p kill since accumulated _' was reduced during this f Growth was almost uni- - continuous at College Sta- luring 1957-58. th was more irregular at iark, probably because con- a unfavorable to plant fa were encountered more fre- y. The major breaks in occurred in mid-January, _ arch and early April. Dur- * last l5 days of January, the q ature dropped below 20° F. ]eral occasions and the aver- perature for the entire per- " as only 36.’3°F. In early i. and early April when tem- I res probably“ would be more E because of the more ad- ‘t stages of growth of the __=.- the temperature dropped izingon one or more days. h stoppage and actual loss of dry matter during those periods are apparent in Figure 5. Less than 50 percent of the total growth at Iowa Park had been produced by March 26, whereas 75 to 100 percent of the growth had been produced at College Station by this date. One to 2 tons more for- age had been produced at College Station‘than at Iowa Park by March 26. Growth was produced at Iowa Park during the winter, but production was lesstreliable from the grazing standpoint than _ at College Station. These results point up the need for more critical grazing management in the Texas areas with colder winters. Although growth behavior of the three varieties without clipping is not presented, some interactions at 7. 6. 5 , _. Alamo _-... Mustang __ ll9-50-8 Tons of dry foroqo pu ooro lowa Park are pointed out. In the early part of the season, all three varieties behaved about alike. Even during the severe cold period in January, there was no difference in the growth of the three varieties even though they differed in win- ter-hardiness. During a freezing period in early March, Alamo pro- duced no growth for 2 weeks, 119- 50-8 made slight growth and Mus- tang made good growth. In early April, Mustang was more severely affected by low temperature than the other two varieties. Evidently the stage of growth is a major fac- tor in determining the influence of low temperature on growth. Al- amo and 119-50-8 apparently were in a critical stage of growth in early March while Mustang, being later d ;-':;:;';::/ Forage hor v0 no d Jon. 3 Foo. l5 Apr. I Nov. Doc. Jan. igmzggnonzlsn 7112i 20$ i: iazs 4 u was] a uszzzoi Fob. Mar. Apr. Dotoo of sampling Figure 4. TOHS Of dly forage per acre Z7 4 ll l5 Z5 I Q |5 zz zs 5 Dec Jan Feb l2 l9 26 5 l2 l9 Z6 l 9 Cumulative growth of three oat varieties grown on Lufkin fine sandy loam, College Station, 1956-57. Coflege Stofion 1957-58 Cofleqe Stoflon |956-57 lowa Pork 1956-57 no 23 so 1 1; 2| :0 Mar Apr May Figure 5. Average cumulative growth of Alamo, Mustang and 119-50-8 oats grown at College Station and Iowa Park. U O g 4000 _ I‘ f, . i e sooo . b U Q ‘ h 3 O czooo, U Q f , . O ¥ ‘H000 . O O O U . C 3 O l g l l é A l as 4o 4s so ss so es 1o Average weighted temperature (‘Fl Figure 6. Regression of oat growth on weighted air temperature, College Station and Iowa Park. 1956-57. _ .. - Forage __ Rainfall 3f Beeville Angleton _ 3Q Z .20 \\ // ‘\ \ // ‘\ I \ \\\'”' _ Z\\. 3 , Kirbyville _ 30 2 . _____ I, _ 2Q ‘§¢-—" 0| Nacogdoches Tons of forage per acre per year m 20 l 1 02-: 03-4 04-0 00-0 00-1 01-0 02-; 03-4 04-5 00-0 0e-1 01-0 Year Figure 7. Average forage yield of small grain varieties and total seasonal rainfall, Beeville, Ilngleton, Temple. Kirbyville. Mount Pleasant and Nacog- daches, 1953-58. lnchesof rainfall- Sent. through April in maturity, did not reach f} ical stage until early April. The relationship of oat ' t0 mean temperature was i ted. Temperature recordedj 3 hours was averaged in com” mean temperatures. The re“ of growth~~pflil mean tempei shown in Figure 6, was hig nificant. The correlation 1 cient was .658 with 17 de l‘ freedom indicating a good re ship between the two variab is apparent from the regressi ure, which is based on bo _ tions in 1956-57, that other also influenced growth. It ficult to maintain moisture , optimum level and this was , tributing factor to variabil growth rate. Some of the.- bility could have been dd sampling error since only a sample was taken from eachf and the stands were not comp uniform. ‘ The regression line sho based on a linear equation. G '_ probably would not be line’ pecially at the lower and limits. The regression line _ indicate no growth below an age temperature of 40 to 4 Some growth was measured at _g Park at temperatures below level, indicating that the cu i not linear. The data do ind that when the temperature below a mean of 45° F, i growth may be expected. Since high temperatures u field conditions are encounti only at or near the end of the i mal growth cycle of oats, it f not possible to determine at V’ point or level high tempera could become a limiting facto_ plant growth. It is evident, ever, that high temperatures f. dom limit oats grown for f0 in Texas. l: Response to Moisture _ Yield in response to mois was not studied under contra, conditions, but some informa can be gained from the data l tained at several locations 0v jfyears. Rainfall varied by fand from season to season location. Figure 7 shows il rainfall for the growing 1September through April, year period at six locations s. Average yield of all va- i' own at each location dur- ' entire 6-year period also in the figure. data are not available for at Angleotn.- The avail- s»: a indicate a negative re- hip of yield and total rain- :he lowest rainfall obtained >- the growing season was l7 inches, which apparently I ate for good production. j an area where drainage is em in periods of high rain- zpparently, poorer perform- ’_' high rainfall years is re- f the drainage problem. lts at Temple indicate a ationship of yield and rain- 0w 20 inches. Above this ' of rainfall, the yield levels “bout 1% tons of air-dry for- i acre. fall apparently was ade- Yduring all years of the test _ ille. The studies were lo- n a deep sandy soil which tly had no drainage prob- g; years of high rainfall. lithe yield level remained Zithe same through the test {fall at Gilmer, which was farest location to Mount t, varied from 13 inches to 3 an 4O inches. Yield was re- J rainfall only in the years of infall. The relatively low in 1956-57 and 1957-58 are lly understood. The test ere located 0n a deep sand hould have been well drain- _., is possible that rainfall in l» 30 inches resulted in some ’g of nutrients, thus reduc- 7 d8‘ _ rainfall and yield varied 3 ably at Nacogdoches, but ationship between the two Qslwas not close. This is a station and the test area was moved during the period. It is possible that soil effects on yield were more important since rainfall exceeded 25 inches except for one year. Information presented in this section shows that rainfall is im- portant in determining expected yields of small grains grown for forage. Rainfall may be insuffi- cient for maximum production in many areas of Texas. The Coast Prairie is less likely to encounter a deficiency, but because of the flat topography and heavy soils, ex- cessive moisture for optimum growth may be encountered. Fail- ure to obtain better relationships of growth and moisture in some cases may have been due in part to rain- fall distribution patterns, inade- quate nutrition and management effects. The incidence of disease also is related to humidity and gen- eral moisture conditions. Severe outbreaks of disease some years would alter the yield-rainfall re- lationships. VARIETY PERFORMANCE Small grains are the most impor- tant crops grown for late fall, win- ter and early spring grazing in Texas. Many varieties which give satisfactory performance are avail- able. Over much of the State the crop is grown primarily for grain, but is grazed during a part of its growing season. Therefore, one of the factors influencing choice of variety is its grain production. Practically all of the varieties that have been tested extensively are commercial grain varieties. Ex- perimental lines that show promise for grain production also are test- ed for forage production. In this way, information on the forage pro- ducing ability is available when the variety is released for commer- cial production. Oats are the predominant cereal crop used for grazing in the cen- tral, eastern and southern sections of the State. Other cereal crops are included in tests in these areas, but research work has been concerned mantis mum lacuna mac-mt ~ ' on: ' i... . ' an M. ‘m*'w ,9“; .00u.n|‘nufl manna. Wflmi‘ H . w! __ l ' i "l- "‘ noon ."P"" run - nun aoucs w“ swung“; "m, unison _ . - In! I x ov \_ woo _ - nus . nun! LALIJMII nsrwo m" . . _/‘ ‘ "‘°" .4 NIL ' K nuvnlo f our! X PILL fill ' l suss- IVE"! can: l . . - ~_. KW“ .""“'-"" ‘"°' -"'°“"° con we 'mnrts-eo\.euu. new _ - o“ . _ i? . _ 1 . mmrm °“""‘°' " unon nun! 6,-2.2“ V I A. /' 41"? I zoucno $5 . ‘ I SOIL‘ ONE! v mm ¢"°°“"" _ .. A . l-——l—_ l n! ' s! . > " /\ 110a mum: \"'.". /q»<' ' . . ./' w" ‘l ‘T l “W” -’ M" .la COR‘ ' ..\ u u‘. \'£ . l. noun Van g Ca»... _/' a. ._\»- if llltl. _ an ‘ sun LLlIlO . IAIBIL‘ ‘ " but . l _ luvvou MM m‘ p V V ' ‘Tr FJ ./\ _/ "Cy _ §;l/\/\- m M” \. rantu. ‘mm v I". j" " aunt: ' t: Q mum uzwavrn MKLI“;‘TH\‘.L ':ouu ‘~ ‘ . l‘ :1 i M / l’ u‘ . I \I fill’! ‘J o: urn-u \ f“ ‘ n ' (‘an xwii-u - ins“, vuuoolnl l" a < .. East Texas Central ...... a...“ _;;__| fikfg / Coast Promo Timberlonds Texas mm B, Beaumont I . MLPleasont 5. Denton wm. 1m; 9_ Pyqiyig View 2,. Nqcgqdgghgg 6. McGregor Tl-s m“ IO. Anqleton 3. Kirbyville 7- Temple ""‘}i1-Y'°°""‘""' - Rio Grands Plain 4 - c°"°°° 5mm" '-'-- .....: ll . Beevilla nDILIO canon l2. Crystal City Figure 8. Areas and locations of small grain variety tests. primarily with oat varieties. De- scriptions of these varieties are available in other publications. The discussions here will be with reference to growth habit, produc- tion of forage and cold tolerance. Varieties differ in total production and in the distribution of produc- tion during the growing season. Oats are classified as spring, win- ter and intermediate types. The so-called “spring types” are not true spring types, such as are grown in the Corn Belt, but are erect TABLE 6. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT MOUNT PLEASANT, 1953-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre - Compara- vamty 1959-54 1954-55 1955-55 1955-51 1957-55 1515 average New Nortex oats 3400 4500 3190 4380 3600 Mustang oats 3900 4870 2460 2290 4160 3540 . Bronco oats 4030 4900 1790 2670 3850 3450 Abruzzi rye 4650 5180 1530 2300 3250 3380 Atlas 66 wheat 4600 1770 1870 4590 3300 Alamo oats 2700 4460 3860 2090 3330 3290 Cordova barley 4390 1880 1870 2490 Quanah wheat 2710 3350 2110 Goliad barley 1940 3810 1950 Gator rye 4680 4450 Elbon rye 4630 4400 TABLE 7. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT NACOGDOCHES. 1952-58 Pounds ot air-dry forage per acre v _ t Compara- we Y ble 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 average’ 1954-58 Bronco oats 4810 4770 3760 7420 3510 4860 Mustang oats 3310 4080 4500 4040 6590 3460 4650 New Nortex oats 4600 3700 3420 4210 4500 Alamo oats 3460 3170 3440 5920 4230 4190 Cordova barley 3970 3140 6030 3480 4160 Victorgrain oats 6130 3990 Atlas 66 wheat 4060 3590 2260 5440 3460 3690 Abruzzi rye 2870 3870 2050 7120 1720 3690 Goliad barley 3000 3060 2150 5120 3420 3440 Elbqn {Ye Suregrain oats 4010 4730 Gator rye 4010 4780 TABLE 8. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT KIRBYVILLE. 1951-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre v _ t Compara- ‘me Y 1951-52 1959-54 1954-55 1955-55 1955-57 1957-55 avgjge 1953-58 Bronco oats 4640 4840 Mustang oats 2960 4550 5040 3410 4300 4520 4360 Victorgrain oats 3570 3900 ' 5040 3730 4200 New Nortex oats 3980 4180 Camellia oats 3670 4160 4430 4160 Ranger oats 3980 4200 3960 Atlas 66 wheat 4470 3180 3400 4430 3920 Alamo oats 2760 4210 4400 3670 3380 3730 3880 Cordova barley 3680 3880 Southland oats 2740 3740 3540 Abruzzi rye 3820 3230 3120 3275 4070 3500 Goliad barley 3160 2510 3160 3180 3930 3190 Midsouth oats 6210 5880 Gator rye 5870 5540 Elbon rye 5670 5340 Suregrain oats 5130 4800 10 growing winter oats of low. ness which produce early when fall-seeded. Winter-ty have a decumbent growth ha the fall and winter and are ' forage production, but are hardy. The intermediate 1s intermediate ‘jbetween sprin’: winter types in these chara‘ tics. Wheat, barley and rye A_ ties also differ in cold-tol, and type of early growth. E Yield results are presente several areas of the State. areas in which rather ext testing has been conducted, shown in Figure 8. These if have been designated as East Timberlands, Coast Prairie; Grande Plain and Central which includes the Blackland" Grand Prairies. Small grainsi used west of these areas, but e _ mental yield data are not at able. .1. The results presented in the lowing tables represent total ' ' duction for the growing Where a small grain is grown? marily for grain production, é age harvesting or grazing w have to be stopped earlier and» age yields would be less. Y'_ are presented in some cases} dates of harvest or periods. F0 production could be determine to the time that cattle would to be removed for grain u: t1on. East Texas Timberlands Results of performance tes three locations in East * Tables 6, 7 and 8, show that - eral varieties produce good t yields. At the central and nort » stations, Mustang, Bronco and A Nortex oats and Abruzzi rye j pear to be satisfactory. For the , tral and southern parts, Must Alamo, Victorgrain, New N0 and Camellia oats, Goliad b and Atlass 66 wheat are sati? tory. Mustang, New Nortex Bronco are winter-type oats, a torgrain is an intermediate _ and Alamo and Camellia are e growing, non-hardy types. Go ' is not winter-hardy north of Y Texas, but makes early p7» the more southern loca- f-bruzzi rye produces good ,ds in much of the State, y» late before making any ible- growth. Atlas 66 as been grown primarily , rly forage production, as i‘ Table 9. 7m of new cereal varie- promise for both early itained forage production. clude Mid-South and Sure- and Elbon and Gator gese varieties are in the sec- _ of testing. If they con- .11 show satisfactory disease i e, they will find a place f: winter forage production '.. in the State. ction varies from one year er, as may be observed in 6, 7 and 8. Forage yields Lermined by variety, mois- of planting, soil type, tion and temperature. ll during the small grain ‘g season for a number of l is shown in Figure 7. results indicate that soil ., e is a major factor in small production in East Texas. - season of production as well v '1 production is important in ing program. Yields at Pleasant in 1957-58 are by periods of the year e-9). Alamo oats and the rye varieties, Gator and k produced the most early I New Nortex oats, which ced good early forage yields f: test, is normally a later for- roducer. It is apparent from rcentage of the forage pro- _ by February 20, that varie- 'ffer widely in their growth .8 Cordova barley and Ab- i rye were low in production ade very little growth before ‘spring. This again is some- f abnormal ‘lifor Cordova bar- tral Texas fiety forage yield tests were cted at four locations in the fal Texas area (Tables 10, 11, 12 and 1S) . These locations were College Station, Temple, McGregor and Denton. Mustang and New Nortex oats and Cordova barley have been outstanding in total for- age production and in its distribu- tion. Alamo oats and Goliad bar- ley produce more early forage in the southern part of this area, but may be damaged by low tempera- tures in the northern part. Goliad barley is very tender and should not be fall-sown north of Temple. Alamo oats produces slightly more early forage than Mustang and New Nortex in the northern part of the area, but may be more se- verely damaged by close grazing or clipping. Bronco oats produces high total forage production but its maximum production is not un- til late winter. For this reason, it TABLE 9. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT MOUNT PLEASANT. ‘1957-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre varietY Late Mid- Late winter- T t l ‘X, produced fall winter early spring ° a by Feb. 20 Gator rye 800 1420 2460 4680 47 Elbon rye 940 1460 2230 4630 52 Atlas 66 wheat 660 1420 2510 4590 50 New Nortex oats 700 770 2910 4380 34 Mustang oats 340 880 2940 4160 29 Bronco oats 220 790 2840 3850 26 Alamo oats 950 580 1800 3330 46 Abruzzi rye 190 700 2360 3250 27_ Cordova barley 50 170 1650 1870 12 TABLE 10. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT COLLEGE STATION. 1954-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre m: t Compara- v my 1954-55 1955-55 1955-57 1957-59 b1» average Elbon rye 6360 5050 4730 New Nortex oats 3680 3230 6640 5050 4650 Victorgrain oats 3300 6360 4520 Atlas 66 wheat 3360 3780 5590 5130 4460 Mustang oats 3300 3140 5410 5250 4280 Bronco oats 2530 6280 4780 4210 Alamo oats 2750 3550 6270 4250 4200 Cordova barley 3150 5650 3930 3920 Goliad barley 2860 3820 4710 4260 3910 Abruzzi rye 3070 1360 5460 3060 3240 Mid-South oats 5870 5500 Gator rye 4990 4620 Suregrain oats 4870 4500 TABLE 11. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT TEMPLE, 1952-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre - Compara- vmety 1952-59 1959-54 1954-55 1955-55 1959-57 1957-59 ble average New Nortex oats 4690 2205 1790 3970 4155 3040 Cordova barley 2595 .1795 3445 4175 3020 Bronco, oats 4175 3260 2035 1715 3630 3375 2800 Mustang oats 4430 2520 2265 1505 2985 3710 2600 Atlas 66 wheat 2385 950 2805 3705 2470 Goliad barley 2170 1965 675 2580 3915 2260 Alamo oats 2185 2440 1035 2075 3525 2250 Abruzzi rye 3975 1995 1620 655 3040 2460 1950 Texan barley 5325 Quanah wheat 3205 Mid-South oats 4110 4090 Suregrain oats 4345 3320 Elbon rye 3600 2580 Gator rye 3060 2030 11 is less desirable in most farm for- age programs, but, because of its high tonnage, may be considered for hay or silage. The newer varieties, especially Elbon and Gator rye, appear prom- ising for the production of early winter grazing on the basis of re- cent tests, but may need further testing. These two varieties ex- ceeded the yield of Goliad barley on February 15, 1958 at McGregor by more than 500 pounds and Al- amo by more than 1,000 pounds- per acre. Rio Grande Plain Small grain variety forage eval- uation tests have been grown at Beeville each year since 1952, Table 14. Yields are relatively low most years at this location because TABLE 12. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT McGREGOR. 1952-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre AZ/eruge o o Variety Compara- forage ' 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1956-57 1957-58 ble on 1st average clipping‘ Goliad barley 6950 5280 37 Cordova barley 5020 4295 4100 7570 5130 22 Mustang oats 4260 4500 4945 4930 6895 5110 20 Mustang-Alamo 4090 3870 5220 5000 20 Bronco oats 4665 4915 4150 6290 4960 16 Quanah wheat 5050 3805 4110 6430 4730 14 Suregrain oats 6295 4630 34 Atlas 66 wheat 6210 4545 30 New Nortex oats 4180 3680 4340 4150 6215 4510 19 Arkwin oats 4225 5810 4420 21 Alamo oats 4020 3780 3770 3945 5760 4250 29 Mid-South oats 5690 4020 14 Elbon rye 5690 4020 63 Gator rye 5395 3730 61 Abruzzi rye 3560 1770 3100 2510 5 ‘First clipping date varied from Feb. 4 to Mar. 3, average Feb. 15. TABLE 13. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT DENTON, 1955-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre v ' Compara- ‘mety 1955-55 1956-57 1957-59 1515 average Bronco oats 3820 3550 3530 Mustang oats 3010 4090 3230 3440 New Nortex oats 2790 3440 3680 3300 Alamo oats 2470 2770 Quanah wheat 2420 2565 3060 2690 Knox wheat 2640 2690 2510 Cordova barley 2450 2210 2730 2460 TABLE 14. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT BEEVILLE, 1952-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre ' Com- Wmely 1952-59 1959-54 1954-55 1955-59 1955-57 1957-59 parable average Alamo 60%. Mustang 40% 2630 2120 1160 1840 2960 3985 2450 Alamo oats 2210 2010 1180 2170 2810 4040 2400 Camellia oats 2070 2100 790 2050 2400 4690 2350 Victorgrain oats 2510 2040 960 2040 2010 4290 2310 Mustang oats 2550 1860 850 1700 2750 3680 2230 New Nortex oats 1710 760 1850 2510 3960 2100 Cordova barley 710 1340 3000 3480 2070 Bronco oats 2070 1930 740 1440 2230 2020 Goliad barley 1890 1930 1030 1860 2180 3160 2010 Arivat barley 730 1940 2420 3210 2010 Abruzzi rye 670 3070 2400 1530 12 of limited moisture. Seasonaf fall exerts a great influeni small grain forage yields, as dent from the maximum yiel duced by Alamo oats in 195‘ dry season, and 1957-58, at season. The highest yield in '1 55 was 1,180 ounds per acre, duced by Alamo oats, whil same variety produced A pounds in a good rainfall year; this 6-year period, varieties p in average yield from “1- 2/150 pounds per acre, or a j of less than 1,000 poupnds, w _ at other locations the range i is 1,500 pounds or more. I Mustang, Alamo, Victor’ Camellia and New Nortex 4 give satisfactory performance, amo and Camellia oats and o: barley are upright varieties A tend to give more early pr tion. A mixture of Alamo? Mustang oats has given satisfa" results and is being used inj Beeville station pasture pro‘: As pointed out in the sectio ' mixtures, this combination '7 about the same average produc , as the individual varieties, if under some conditions may some advantage over either i’ alone. 4 Irrigated small grains are gr for grazing in some parts of Rio Grande Plain. The yield formance of selected varieties der irrigation at Crystal Cit given in Table 15. High yields ' be obtained with irrigation management. A number of v' ties, including Victorgrain, g win, New Nortex, Mustang '1 Alamo, produce good yields. . upright varieties, such as G0 and Alamo, will give more»! production but somewhat less tal production. ’ Coast Prairie Forage yield data for three 1 ' cations are given in Tables 16, and 18. Yields are not as high: this area as might be expected‘ the basis of a long growing se’ and more adequate moisture. 1 fact, it would appear that excess rainfall on the Coast Prairie I: lds. Rainfall in the 1957- lag season for small grains 1'38 inches. The yields at _: in 1957-58 were not as about 20 inches. _ barley and Mustang oats y the most consistent in _nce in this area. Goliad 3| oats are early varieties, ikely to produce less total an Mustang and are more alto management practices. er varieties, Elbon and g e and Mid-South oats, Nmise provided they have 1- disease resistance. Dis- major factor in this area 'fy account for poor yield ‘nce in some years. ,1 TY MIXTURES small grain varieties differ Qth habit and the season in i aximum growth is pro- some advantage might be lthrough combinations of i: Work was started in 1954- iollege Station to evaluate '_ combinations of a winter ring-type oat. The results udy are presented in Table it significant difference is Lin total yield among the iicombinations. The mix- ‘roduced about the same the first clipping as Alamo same total yield as Mus- he cross-seeding produced less than any of the seed s. '1 ixture study was expanded “- to include several types of grains and ryegrass. This §has been conducted for 3 nd the results are presented 1e20. All of the mixed seed .31 up of equal parts by f of each variety since the study had indicated no dif- with the various propor- _-¢ Mustang and Alamo. The “t1 ixtures gavel i slightly better jnd total production than the edings. The seed mixtures ed somewhat less early for- an pure stands of Alamo and , but more than Mustang. xception to this was Mus- } 1955-56 when the rain-y tang-Abruzzi rye which is a mix- ture of two late types. This mix- ture performed about the same as a pure stand of Mustang. A cross- seeding of Goliad and ryegrass per- formed about the same as Goliad, with slightly more late production than with Goliad alone. In this mixture, ryegrass contributed sig- nificantly to the yield, but appar- ently the yield of Goliad was re- duced accordingly after the early harvest since the total yield was no greater. This combination might be more reliable for late pro- duction than pure Goliad since Goliad frequently is damaged by disease during the spring. TABLE 15. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT CRYSTAL CITY -WITH IRRIGATION. 1952-57 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre - Com- Vcmety 1952-59 1953-54 1954-55 1955-51 parable average Victorgrain oats 10490 6800 9020 7060 8340 Arkwin oats 9250 7810 9100 8310 New Nortex oats 10140 7350 9600 5000 8070 Alamo oats 7170 8980 7030 8030 Abruzzi rye 10050 7450 5280 8020 Mustang oats 7510 7200 10120 6110 7740 Atlas 66 wheat 8000 7060 7510 Goliad barley 6970 6110 7800 8380 7320 TABLE 16. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT PRAIRIE VIEW. 1954-57 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre Vmiety 1954-55 1955-55 1956-571 Czfgféggle Atlas 66 wheat 3270 48402 4300 Bronco oats 4780 2930 49002 4200 Victorgrain oats 4600 4160 3940 Abruzzi rye 4420 2100 52902 3940 Mustang oats 4230 3310 4200 3910 Alamo oats 3640 3590 3650 3630 New Nortex oats 4870 2580 3430 3630 Cordova barley 2750 34402 3340 Goliad barley 3600 2470 3520 3200 1Harvested the first time on March 14, resulting in no regrowth for most varieties. zlncludes some regrowth. TABLE 17. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT BEAUMONT, 1953-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre Variety i C°m' 1953-54 1955-56 1956-57 1957-58 parable average Elbon rye 5270 4710 5370 Mid-South oats 5295 5300 Mustang oats 4850 5660 3330 5340 4790 Floriland oats 5470 4710 Atlas 66 wheat 3750 5620 4610 4660 New Nortex oats 4535 3910 5280 4580 Camellia oats 5340 4580 Victorgrain oats 5280 2950 4500 Bronco oats 5560 4100 3550 4610 4450 Gator rye 4310 4310 Suregrain oats 4290 4290 Alber oats 5040 4280 Alamo oats 4240 5440 3340 3670 4170 Cordova barley 3360 5160 3790 4260 4140 Southland oats 4170 4490 3950 Goliad barley 3250 4730 3860 3840 3920 Abruzzi rye 4030 3840 1090 2990 - 13 A mixture of 6O percent Alamo and 40 percent Mustang has been seeded at Beeville each year since 1952. The results of this study in comparison with Alamo and Mus- tang are presented in Table 21. Forage production of this mixture has not been greatly different from TABLE 18. FORAGE YIELD OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES AT ANGLETON 1954-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre Variety C°m' 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1957-58 parable ~ average Mid-South oats 3000 4070 Camellia oats 5520 4040 Suregrain oats 2720 3790 Victorgrain oats 4910 3730 Mississippi Red oats 2630 3700 Texas Red oats 2580 3650 Mustang oats 4910 2670 4390 2400 3590 ' Alamo oats 4110 2260 5560 2430 3590 Ranger oats 4660 3480 Southland oats 2290 3360 Elbon rye 2000 3070 New Nortex oats 2800 2870 2310 3050 Goliad barley 4090 2880 2700 2190 2960 Atlas 66 wheat 3150 2440 1910 2890 Bronco oats 2980 2050 2320 2840 Cordova barley 3340 1470 2460 Abruzzi rye 1790 1090 Domestic ryegrass 4120 1510 2670 1210 2380 Gulf ryegrass 2800 3870 Texas Rescue 46 3350 4150 TABLE 19. FORAGE YIELD OF OATS SEEDED IN PURE STANDS AND VARIETY MIXTURES, LUFKIN FINE SANDY LOAM SOIL, COLLEGE STATION, 1954-55 Variety or mixture Pounds of air-dry forage per acre Ian. 3 Feb. 24 Apr. 15 Total Mustang 50%, Alamo 50% 1100 940 1290 3330 Mustang 60%, Alamo 40% 1170 1040 1220 0430 Mustang 70%, Alamo 00% 1220 1110 1000 0060 Mustang 50%, Alamo 50%‘ 900 810 1190 2900 Mustang 770 1160 1450 3300 1200 850 910 2960 Alamo ‘Cross-seeded. TABLE 20. FORAGE YIELD OFVWINTER CROPS SEEDED ALONE AND IN PURE STANDS, LUFKIN FINE SANDY LOAM SOIL, COLLEGE STATION, 1955-58 Variety or mixture Pounds of air-dry forage per acre Ian. 15 Mar. 1 Apr. 1 May 1 Total SEED MIXED‘ Mustang-Alamo 1440 1470 1310 550 4770 Mustang-Goliad 1790 1510 990 660 4950 Mustang-Atlas 66 1660 1610 650 760 4680 Mustang-Abruzzi 800 1430 1320 550 4100 CROSS-SEEDED Mustang-Alamo” 1160 1420 1250 580 4410 Mustang-Goliad” 1480 1620 790 630 4520 Mustang-Goliad” 1270 1620 1020 670 4580 Goliad-ryegrass‘ 2080 1000 790 710 4580 PURE STANDS‘ Mustang 1050 1590 1100 490 4230 Alamo 1830 950 1190 610 4580 Goliad 2010 1040 880 450 4380 ‘80 pounds of seed per acre. 280 pounds of seed per acre of each. 340 pounds of seed per acre of each. ‘80 pounds of seed of Goliad and 15 pounds of ryegrass per acre. 14 pure stands of Alamo. Th’ ture produces about the sam, forage as Alamo and does no up in late spring as well as tang. It is possible that thi ture might be more unifo production year after year t; the varieties ado not respo ¥ same to environmental vari and diseases. This should ;v more stable response. Res Denton with various combi 4 of small grains have been s, to those at Beeville. I These results do not in any yield advantage to cros ings of two small grain type it is doubtful that the addi seeding cost could be justifi” is possible that cross-seedings i“ give better footing for cattle this is likely to be a proble The use of mixtures of two _ grain types produced forage in all cases to pure stands 1 rieties. If properly manage benefits of the two types mi. derived from a mixture. H0 * this practice would introduc tain problems. Seed of va mixtures would be difficu identify accurately, and unl; buyer was certain of the m‘j offered for sale, purchase of‘ seed of the two varieties with? ing at planting time might be ~. desirable. Grazing manag would be more exacting ifi benefits of the mixture were ' realized. As discussed earlier? quent grazing of an early 1T type may damage it in early 7: of growth. This would hold: in the mixture. Late harv or grazing of an early type 1 mixture may result in the A type being retarded and the? ture behaving as an early ty addition to these factors, ences in palatability could i“ duce differential grazing espe where different species wer§ volved, such as barley and 0a rye and oats. I SMALL GRAIN-LEG MIXTURES Annual winter legumes 1 i been used with small grai ~ goats, to increase produc- fimprove quality. Studies ‘i actice have been conduct- i 0 soil types at College nd at Nacogdoches. The ' e summarized in Table probably is the most com- _-; me seeded with small fr forage. Table 22 shows ly higher yield of oats and i compared with oat alone oches and on Miller Clay iCollege Station. Crimson as the only legume which 5» show some increase in i er oats alone at Nacog- while oat yields on Lufkin College Station were better f2» legume. The percentage h in the forage shows that ; mes grew better in the ibottom than on upland soil gge Station. While the for- not separated into grass j me components at Nacog- fair legume growth was ob- addition to influencing legumes also may influence i quality. Crude protein from these studies are i’ in Table 23. The legume p d the percentage of crude _ in the total forage, and it . d the crude protein in the component of the mixture. occurred even when the le- constituted as little as 4 per- g the mixture. Increases in content of the total forage i from 2 to 9 percent, de- i g on the amount of legume t. Oats grown alone aver- l4 to 18 percent crude pro- the forage. The value of es in crude protein above vel may be questionable un- f system of grazing and feed- nagement is practiced where- ypart of the energy require- of the animal is supplied ;other sourc-esa- ese studies indicate that rel- y little is gained from plant- e annual legumes used in _ studies with an oat variety forage» production. Where it is ed, the use of vetch may be an exception. These results are considered from the standpoint of forage production only. The pos- sible soil-improving benefits of annual winter legumes in combi- nation with small grains are not considered. SEEDING RATES AND METHODS Seeding rate studies have been limited, but in general have shown that seeding rates between 48 and 96 pounds usually do not greatly TABLE 21. FORAGE YIELD OF MUSTANG, ALAMO AND A MIXTURE OF MUS- TANG AND ALAMO OATS AT BEEVILLE. 1952-57 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre O Year and date Alamo Mustang leltxgéing 1952-53 April 8 2040 2130 2360 May 23 170 420 270 Total 2210 2550 2630 1953-54 Feb. 7 1080 730 1020 April 7 660 610 730 May 20 270 530 370 Total 2010 1860 2120 1954-55 March 31 1180 850 1160 1955-56 Feb. 13 1330 820 1040 April 8 850 880 800 Total 2170 1700 1840 1956-57 Feb. 4 1800 1380 1920 April 12 1010 1370 1040 Total 2810 2750 2960 Comparable average 2080 1940 2140 TABLE 22. FORAGE YIELD OF OATS GROWN ALONE AND WITH LEGUMES AT COLLEGE STATION ON LUFKIN FINE SANDY LOAM AND MILLER CLAY SOIL. AND AT NACOGDOCHES Pounds of air-dry forage per acre College Station °<=*S with Luikin fine N°‘°°g‘ sandy loam‘ Miller clay 1953-56 7° legume 1954-55 ‘X, legume No legume 4850 2530 4370 Vetch 4380 14 3430 44 4510 Winter peas 4030 24 3000 50 ' Crimson clover 4170 3 2580 14 4270 California burclover 4010 4 2530 19 4550 Red clover 4210 2560 5 4690 TABLE 23. PROTEIN CONTENT OF OAT FORAGE AS INFLUENCED BY A LE- GUME IN THE MIXTURE. COLLEGE STATION. 1955 Percentage crude protein Luikin line sandy loam soil Miller clay soil Mixture Mar. 2s Apr. 2s Mar. 11 L - M’ - L - Mi - Le- Mix- Grass gufne tul; Grass gufne “n: Grdss gume hue Oats alone 14.2 14.2 18.3 18.3 14.0 14.0 Oats-winter peas 19.4 33.1 25.1 23.0 36.5 23.5 16.9 33.9 27.0 Oats-bur clover 16.0 16.0 20.3 20.3 16.1 30.3 21.4 15 influence total forage production. The results of a seeding rate study at Crystal City with irrigation in 1952-53 are given in Table 24. a but total Early production was increased with the higher rates of seeding, production with 96 pounds of seed was only 500 TABLE 24. FORAGE PRODUCTION WITH VARIOUS RATES OF SEEDING MUS- TANG OATS AT CRYSTAL CITY, 1952-53 Pounds oi seed Pounds of air-dry forage per acre P“ acre Ian. 3 Feb. 10 Mar. 18 Total 48 3110 2380 4050 9540 84 3080 2790 3480 9330 80 3380 1740 3480 8800 98 4400 2010 3880 10090 TABLE 25. INFLUENCE OF RATE OF SEEDING AND CLIPPING FREQUENCY ON THE FORAGEYIELD OF ALAMO AND MUSTANG OATS, KIRBYVILLE, 1957-58 Pounds of air-dry forage per acre vfllietY Pounds of seed per acre Average 48 84 80 98 112 Alamo 8890 8350 8830 8920 8050 8570 Mustang 8020 5880 8000 8500 8880 8210 Average 8380 8020 8420 8710 8480 TABLE 26. FORAGE YIELDS OF VARIOUS OATS WITH VARIOUS ROW SPACINGS AND SEEDING RATES AT BEEVILLE. 1953-56 Treatment Pounds of air-dry forage per acre Row spacing. Pounds of inches seed pa; acre 1954 1955 1956 1957 Average 12 32 2140 1040 1890 880 1440 12 48 2030 1080 1870 1780 1880 12 64 1950 1100 1750 1410 1550 18 48 1880 1140 1800 1350 1540 36 24 1360 1220 1400 1170 1290 36 38 1960 1360 1490 910 1430 36 - 48 1880 1160 1540 950 1330 1B pounds above that with 48 p0 v Similar results were obtain‘ Kirbyville in 1957-58. Yieldft ied less than 700 pounds with rates from 48 to 112 pounds acre, Table 25. Because o; need for early production an slight advanileage of increased t. numbers in “producing early duction, it probably is adv' to use 64 to 80 pounds of seed acre. " Most small grains are drill ed with the drills 7 to 8 i“ apart. Experimental plantin most instances were in 12-inch 4 or drills for convenience in h‘ ling the small plots. Row spa and seeding rate studies have I conducted at Beeville for 4 y The results are presented in 7g 26. It is apparent that neither y spacing nor seeding rate influ; forage production significa‘ Yields with 36-inch row plan _ tended to be slightly less than T 12 and 18-inch rows. These sttil were conducted in a dry Where moisture is adequate, might be a greater reductio’ yield from wide rows. How these results do indicate that tillering characteristic of s grains tends to compensate f lower plant populations whe from lower seeding rates or w: row spacings. 7