Effect of Sowing Date and Cutting Stage on Yield and Quality of Irrigated Barley and Triticale Used for Forage and Grain
C. Royo, A. López, João Serra, F. Tribó
Abstract
C. Royo, A. López, João Serra, F. Tribó
Abstract
Abstract The influence of cutting stage on forage and grain yield and quality has been studied in three barley and one triticale varieties, using two sowing dates in each of two sites. When cut at the first detectable node stage (C.31), forage yield was almost double the yield at the pseudo‐stem erect stage (C.30). Barley yielded more forage than triticale at both cutting stages. Both species had similar forage protein content, but forage fibre content was greater in barley than in triticale. Cutting at stage 30 reduced grain yield by about 11 % and at stage 31 by nearly 35 %. Barley and triticale had similar grain yield. Grain protein content was not affected by forage removal, but was significantly greater in triticale than in barley. The later the stage of cutting, the greater was the delay in heading date. Triticale was more responsive to environmental conditions than barley.
OpenAlex reports 23 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Abstract The influence of cutting stage on forage and grain yield and quality has been studied in three barley and one triticale varieties, using two sowing dates in each of two sites. When cut at the first detectable node stage (C.31), forage yield was almost double the yield at the pseudo‐stem erect stage (C.30). Barley yielded more forage than triticale at both cutting stages. Both species had similar forage protein content, but forage fibre content was greater in barley than in triticale. Cutting at stage 30 reduced grain yield by about 11 % and at stage 31 by nearly 35 %. Barley and triticale had similar grain yield. Grain protein content was not affected by forage removal, but was significantly greater in triticale than in barley. The later the stage of cutting, the greater was the delay in heading date. Triticale was more responsive to environmental conditions than barley.
Key concepts: Triticale, Agronomy, Sowing, Forage, Biology, Yield (engineering), Grain yield, Semis