pr-705: 2015 long-term summary of kentucky forage variety

20
RESEARCH AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND ENVIRONMENT, LEXINGTON, KY, 40546 University of Kentucky • Lexington, Kentucky 40546 PR-705 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety Trials G.L. Olson, S.R. Smith, Plant and Soil Sciences List of Tables page Table 1. White Clover Yield .......................................... 1 Table 2. Red Clover Yield .............................................. 2 Table 3 Alfalfa Yield ...................................................... 4 Table 4. Tall Fescue Yield .............................................. 6 Table 5. Orchardgrass Yield ......................................... 7 Table 6. Annual Ryegrass Yield ................................... 8 Table 7. Timothy Yield.................................................10 Table 8. Kentucky Bluegrass Yield............................10 Table 9 Perennial Ryegrass Yield .............................12 Table 10. Festulolium Yield ..........................................14 Table 11. Sudangrass Yield ..........................................14 Table 12. Sorghum-Sudangrass Yield .......................15 Table 13. Pearl Millet Yield ...........................................15 Table 14. Teff Yield .........................................................16 Table 15. White Clover Grazing...................................16 Table 16. Perennial Ryegrass Grazing .......................17 Table 17. Orchardgrass Horse Grazing ......................17 Table 18 Alfalfa Grazing...............................................18 Table 19. Tall Fescue Grazing.......................................19 Table 20. Tall Fescue Horse Grazing...........................19 Table 21. Orchardgrass Grazing ..................................20 Table 1. Summary of Kentucky white clover yield trials 2002-2015 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial). Variety Type Proprietor Lexington Princeton Quicksand Eden Shale Mean 3 (#trials) 02 1,2 03 04 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 03 05 03 03 3yr 4 3yr 3-yr 2-yr 2-yr 3yr 2yr 3yr 3yr 2yr 2yr 3yr 3-yr 2yr 2yr Advantage Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 125 106 116(2) Alice Intermediate Barenbrug USA 86 Avoca Dutch DLF International Seeds 59 82 71(2) Barblanca Intermediate Barenbrug USA 92 CA ladino Ladino Public 100 124 103 98 106(4) Colt Intermediate Seed Research of OR 90 57 114 87(3) Common Dutch Public 100 53 98 78 82(4) Companion Ladino Oregro Seeds 87 94 92 91(3) Crescendo Ladino Cal/West Seeds 105 140 109 118(3) Crusader II Intermediate Allied Seed, L.L.C. 90 50 54 69 66(4) Excel Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 100 Durana Intermediate Pennington 94 94 88 82 85 97 93 84 94 87 83 101 95 91(13) GWC-AS10 Ladino Ampac Seed 102 Insight Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 128 Ivory Intermediate Cebeco 96 Ivory II Intermediate DLF International Seeds 86 101 127 105(3) Jumbo Ladino Ampac Seed 93 Jumbo II Ladino Ampac Seed 121 101 111(2) Kopu II Intermediate Ampac Seed 97 97 95 95 103 96 80 90 94(8) KY Select Intermediate KY. Agric. Exp. Station 98 95 97(2) Ocoee Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 89 74 82(2) Patriot Intermediate Pennington 103 87 104 113 95 117 117 99 81 104 100 98 99 101(13) Pinnacle Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 120 111 116(2) Rampart Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 80 89 97 83 87(4) Regal Ladino Public 99 96 92 125 100 116 118 129 147 127 107 100 104 112(13) RegalGraze Ladino Cal/West Seeds 127 140 102 103 118(4) Resolute Intermediate FFR/Southern States 63 Seminole Ladino Saddle Butte Ag. Inc 108 70 79 86(3) Super Haifa Intermediate Allied Seed, L.L.C. 77 Tillman II Ladino Caudill Seed 103 WBDX Dutch Saddle Butte Ag. Inc 72 Will Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 107 162 150 132 107 119 137 130 128 136 131(10) 1 Year trial was established. 2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in forage yield between varieties. To find actual yields, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 2010 was harvested three years, so the final report would be “2012 Red and White Clover Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage. 3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials. 4 Number of years of data. Introduction Forage crops occupy approximately 7 million acres in Kentucky. Forages provide a majority of the nutrition for beef, dairy, horse, goat, sheep, and wildlife in the state. In addition, forage crops play an environmentally friendly role in soil conservation, water quality, and air quality. ere are over 60 forage species adapted to the climate and soil conditions of Kentucky. Only 10 to 12 of these species occupy the majority of the acreage, but within these species there is a tremendous variation in varieties. This publication was developed to provide a user-friendly guide to choosing the best variety for producers based on a summary of forage yield and grazing

Upload: others

Post on 21-May-2022

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

R E S E A R C H

AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONUNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND ENVIRONMENT, LEXINGTON, KY, 40546

University of Kentucky • Lexington, Kentucky 40546

PR-705

2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety TrialsG.L. Olson, S.R. Smith, Plant and Soil Sciences

List of Tables pageTable 1. White Clover Yield ..........................................1Table 2. Red Clover Yield ..............................................2Table 3 Alfalfa Yield ......................................................4Table 4. Tall Fescue Yield ..............................................6Table 5. Orchardgrass Yield .........................................7Table 6. Annual Ryegrass Yield ...................................8Table 7. Timothy Yield.................................................10Table 8. Kentucky Bluegrass Yield............................10Table 9 Perennial Ryegrass Yield .............................12Table 10. Festulolium Yield ..........................................14Table 11. Sudangrass Yield ..........................................14Table 12. Sorghum-Sudangrass Yield .......................15Table 13. Pearl Millet Yield ...........................................15Table 14. Teff Yield .........................................................16Table 15. White Clover Grazing ...................................16Table 16. Perennial Ryegrass Grazing .......................17Table 17. Orchardgrass Horse Grazing ......................17Table 18 Alfalfa Grazing ...............................................18Table 19. Tall Fescue Grazing.......................................19Table 20. Tall Fescue Horse Grazing ...........................19Table 21. Orchardgrass Grazing ..................................20

Table 1. Summary of Kentucky white clover yield trials 2002-2015 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).

Variety Type Proprietor

Lexington Princeton QuicksandEden Shale

Mean3

(#trials)021,2 03 04 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 03 05 03 033yr4 3yr 3-yr 2-yr 2-yr 3yr 2yr 3yr 3yr 2yr 2yr 3yr 3-yr 2yr 2yr

Advantage Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 125 106 116(2)Alice Intermediate Barenbrug USA 86 –Avoca Dutch DLF International

Seeds59 82 71(2)

Barblanca Intermediate Barenbrug USA 92 –CA ladino Ladino Public 100 124 103 98 106(4)Colt Intermediate Seed Research of OR 90 57 114 87(3)Common Dutch Public 100 53 98 78 82(4)Companion Ladino Oregro Seeds 87 94 92 91(3)Crescendo Ladino Cal/West Seeds 105 140 109 118(3)Crusader II Intermediate Allied Seed, L.L.C. 90 50 54 69 66(4)Excel Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 100 –Durana Intermediate Pennington 94 94 88 82 85 97 93 84 94 87 83 101 95 91(13)GWC-AS10 Ladino Ampac Seed 102 –Insight Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 128 –Ivory Intermediate Cebeco 96 –Ivory II Intermediate DLF International

Seeds86 101 127 105(3)

Jumbo Ladino Ampac Seed 93 –Jumbo II Ladino Ampac Seed 121 101 111(2)Kopu II Intermediate Ampac Seed 97 97 95 95 103 96 80 90 94(8)KY Select Intermediate KY. Agric. Exp.

Station98 95 97(2)

Ocoee Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 89 74 82(2)Patriot Intermediate Pennington 103 87 104 113 95 117 117 99 81 104 100 98 99 101(13)Pinnacle Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 120 111 116(2)Rampart Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 80 89 97 83 87(4)Regal Ladino Public 99 96 92 125 100 116 118 129 147 127 107 100 104 112(13)RegalGraze Ladino Cal/West Seeds 127 140 102 103 118(4)Resolute Intermediate FFR/Southern States 63 –Seminole Ladino Saddle Butte Ag. Inc 108 70 79 86(3)Super Haifa Intermediate Allied Seed, L.L.C. 77 –Tillman II Ladino Caudill Seed 103 –WBDX Dutch Saddle Butte Ag. Inc 72 –Will Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 107 162 150 132 107 119 137 130 128 136 131(10)

1 Year trial was established.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in forage yield between varieties.

To find actual yields, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 2010 was harvested three years, so the final report would be “2012 Red and White Clover Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage.

3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.4 Number of years of data.

Introduction Forage crops occupy approximately 7 million acres in Kentucky. Forages provide a majority of the nutrition for beef, dairy, horse, goat, sheep, and wildlife in the state. In addition, forage crops play an environmentally friendly role in soil conservation, water quality, and air quality. There are over 60 forage

species adapted to the climate and soil conditions of Kentucky. Only 10 to 12 of these species occupy the majority of the acreage, but within these species there is a tremendous variation in varieties. This publication was developed to provide a user-friendly guide to choosing the best variety for producers based on a summary of forage yield and grazing

Page 2: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

2

Tabl

e 2.

Sum

mar

y of

Ken

tuck

y re

d cl

over

yie

ld tr

ials

200

0-20

15 (y

ield

show

n as

a p

erce

ntag

e of

the

mea

n of

the

nam

ed co

mm

erci

al v

arie

ties i

n th

e tr

ial).

Varie

tyPr

oprie

tor

Lexi

ngto

nPr

ince

ton

Qui

cksa

ndEd

en S

hale

Mea

n3

(#tr

ials

)00

1,2

0001

0203

0406

0809

1011

1213

1400

0305

0809

1113

0103

0508

1000

0308

103y

r43y

r3y

r3y

r3y

r3y

r2y

r3y

r2y

r3y

r3y

r2y

r2y

r2y

r3y

r3y

r2y

r3y

r2y

r2y

r3y

r2y

r2y

r3y

r3y

r3y

r3y

r2y

r3y

r3y

rAA

117E

RAB

I Alfa

lfa11

087

9296

(3)

Accl

aim

Allie

d Se

ed92

–Ar

lingt

onW

I Agr

. Exp

.Sta

.72

–Be

lleAg

ribio

tech

8882

85(2

)Ch

erok

eeFL

Agr

. Exp

. Sta

.78

6572

(2)

Cinn

amon

FFR/

Sou.

St.

111

108

110(

2)Ci

nnam

on P

lus

FFR/

Sou.

St.

9710

911

212

311

794

116

101

9011

210

210

210

010

010

310

812

410

812

210

7(19

)Co

mm

on O

Publ

ic96

9763

9288

6772

7782

(8)

Dom

inio

nSe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

R10

295

102

9310

910

0(5)

Dur

atio

nCi

sco

Co.

8610

010

697

(3)

Emar

wan

Turf

-See

d91

117

106

101

9910

3(5)

Free

dom

!Ba

renb

rug

USA

108

105

127

123

9611

891

100

108

106

109

9910

099

105

110

136

107

116

9510

711

110

311

910

611

510

210

210

014

010

9(30

)Fr

eedo

m!M

RBa

renb

rug

USA

118

115

102

114

114

112

106

101

108

9411

112

811

812

511

2(14

)FS

G 40

2Al

lied

Seed

102

114

108(

2)FS

G 96

01Al

lied

Seed

89–

Galla

ntTu

rner

See

d10

010

710

4(2)

Impa

ctSp

ecia

lty S

eeds

106

9798

100(

3)Ju

liet

Caud

ill S

eed

8493

9084

5982

(5)

Kenl

and

(cer

t.)KY

Ag.

Exp

Sta.

110

111

127

139

118

117

117

9911

199

116

114

106

108

104

102

9211

310

610

611

511

188

105

104

123

104

9811

013

811

0(30

)Ke

nlan

d (u

ncer

t)Pu

blic

8274

8367

6692

77(6

)

Kens

tar

KY A

g.Ex

p St

a.10

510

410

5(2)

Kent

onKY

Ag.

Exp

Sta.

100

9311

910

990

9511

212

198

9510

511

294

9399

106

9810

298

102(

19)

Kenw

ayKY

Ag.

Exp

Sta.

106

104

111

134

9711

911

810

094

106

103

100

103

9410

210

6(15

)LS

970

3Le

wis

Seed

107

8697

(2)

Mor

ning

Sta

rCa

l/Wes

t See

ds90

9090

(2)

Plus

Allie

d Se

ed11

311

397

108(

3)Pl

us II

Allie

d Se

ed13

097

114(

2)Pr

ima

Publ

ic92

7483

(2)

continuedtolerance trials conducted in Kentucky

over the past 12 to 15 years. Detailed variety reports and forage management publications are available from your lo-cal county agent or at the University of Kentucky forage Web site at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage by clicking on the “Forage Variety Trial” link.

Species in This Report Red clover (Trifolium pratense L.) is a high-quality, short-lived, perennial legume that is used in mixed or pure stands for pasture, hay, silage, green chop, soil improvement, and wildlife habitat. This species is adapted to a wide range of climatic and soil conditions and therefore is versatile as a forage crop. Stands of im-proved varieties are generally productive for two to three years, with the highest yields occurring in the year following establishment. Red clover is used pri-marily as a renovation legume for grass pastures. It is a dominant forage legume in Kentucky because it is relatively easy to establish and has high forage quality and high yield. White clover (Trifolium repens L.) is a low-growing, perennial pasture legume with white flowers. It differs from red clover in that the stems (stolons) grow along the surface of the soil and can form adventitious roots that may lead to the development of new plants. White clover is classified into ladino, Dutch, and intermediate types. The intermediate types combine the higher yield of ladino with the grazing tolerance of the Dutch types. Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) has histori-cally been the highest yielding, highest quality forage legume grown in Ken-tucky. It forms the basis of Kentucky’s cash hay enterprise and is an important component in dairy, horse, beef, and sheep diets and wildlife habitat. Choos-ing a good alfalfa variety is a key step in establishing a stand of alfalfa. The choice of variety can impact yield, stand persis-tence, insect and disease resistance, and grazing tolerance. Orchardgrass (Dactylus glomerata) is a high-quality, productive, cool-season grass that is well adapted to Kentucky conditions. This grass is used for pasture, hay, green chop, and silage, but it requires better management than tall fescue for

Page 3: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

3

Tabl

e 2.

continued

Varie

tyPr

oprie

tor

Lexi

ngto

nPr

ince

ton

Qui

cksa

ndEd

en S

hale

Mea

n3

(#tr

ials

)00

1,2

0001

0203

0406

0809

1011

1213

1400

0305

0809

1113

0103

0508

1000

0308

103y

r43y

r3y

r3y

r3y

r3y

r2y

r3y

r2y

r3y

r3y

r2y

r2y

r2y

r3y

r3y

r2y

r3y

r2y

r2y

r3y

r2y

r2y

r3y

r3y

r3y

r3y

r2y

r3y

r3y

rQ

uine

quel

iCa

udill

See

d92

8057

76(3

)Re

d Go

ld

Pros

eeds

M

arke

ting

8189

102

91(3

)

Red

Gold

Plu

sTu

rner

See

d97

9795

9598

9897

(6)

Redl

anGr

aze

ABI A

lfalfa

95–

Redl

anGr

aze

IIAm

eric

as A

lfalfa

9110

493

96(3

)Re

dlan

d M

axAB

I Alfa

lfa95

–Re

dsta

rtSy

ngen

ta10

278

90(2

)Ro

bust

Scot

t See

d92

–Ro

bust

IISe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

R11

010

810

9(2)

Rock

etSe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

R10

610

810

7(2)

Rojo

Dia

blo

Grea

t Pla

ins

9910

110

0(2)

Roya

l Red

FFR/

Sou.

St.

108

9291

9697

(4)

Rust

ler

Ore

gro

Seed

s83

101

8494

9910

494

(6)

Scar

let

Dai

ryla

nd95

–Si

enna

Grea

t Pla

ins

9110

699

(2)

Solid

Prod

uctio

n Se

rvic

e97

102

9884

7998

8786

7610

584

91(1

1)

SS-0

303R

CGFF

R/So

u.St

.11

010

310

7(2)

Star

fire

Ampa

c Se

ed97

9399

9895

96(5

)St

arfir

e II

Cal/W

est &

Am

pac

101

111

104

112

110

112

115

111

110(

8)

Trip

le Tr

ust 3

50AB

I Alfa

lfa10

192

9295

(3)

Vesn

aD

LF-J

enks

5396

75(2

)W

ildca

tBr

ett Y

oung

See

ds10

110

798

102(

3)1

Year

tria

l was

est

ablis

hed.

2 Us

e th

is su

mm

ary

tabl

e as

a g

uide

in m

akin

g va

riety

dec

ision

s, bu

t ref

er to

spec

ific

year

ly re

port

s to

dete

rmin

e st

atist

ical

diff

eren

ces i

n fo

rage

yie

ld b

etw

een

varie

ties.

To fi

nd a

ctua

l yie

lds,

look

in th

e ye

arly

repo

rt fo

r the

fina

l ye

ar o

f eac

h sp

ecifi

c tr

ial.

For e

xam

ple,

the

Lexi

ngto

n tr

ial p

lant

ed in

201

0 w

as h

arve

sted

thre

e ye

ars,

so th

e fin

al re

port

wou

ld b

e “20

12 R

ed a

nd W

hite

Clo

ver R

epor

t” ar

chiv

ed in

the

KY F

orag

e w

ebsit

e at

ww

w.u

ky.e

du/A

g/Fo

rage

.3

Mea

n on

ly p

rese

nted

whe

n re

spec

tive

varie

ty w

as in

clud

ed in

two

or m

ore

tria

ls.4

Num

ber o

f yea

rs o

f dat

a.

higher yields, quality, and long stand life. It produces an open, bunch-type sod, making it very compatible with alfalfa or red clover as a pasture and hay crop or as habitat for wildlife. Tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) is a productive, well-adapted, persistent, soil-conserving, cool-season grass that is grown on approximately 5.5 million acres in Kentucky. This grass, used for both hay and pasture, is the forage base for most of Kentucky’s livestock enterprises, particularly beef cattle. The predominant variety, KY31, was developed in Kentucky for long-term persistence but contains a fungal endophyte that produces alkaloids detrimental to livestock production and reproductive health. Endophyte-free tall fescue varieties produce no detrimental alkaloids, but UK research shows that they are less persistent than KY31. New novel endophyte tall fescue varieties contain safe endophytes, which enhance stand persistence but cause no detrimen-tal animal symptoms. Annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) and perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) are high-quality, productive, cool-season grasses used in Kentucky. Both have exceptionally high seedling vigor and are highly palatable to livestock. Annual ryegrasses are increasing in use across Kentucky as more winter-hardy variet-ies are released and promoted. Annual ryegrass is productive for six to eight months when planted early fall (late August/September) and is used primar-ily for late fall and early to late spring pasture. Perennial ryegrass can be used as a short-lived hay or pasture plant and has growth characteristics similar to tall fescue. It is less persistent than other cool-season grass species. There are both diploid (two sets of chromosomes) and tetraploid (four sets of chromosomes) varieties of perennial ryegrass. Tetra-ploids have larger tillers and seedheads and wider leaves. Tetraploid types tend to be taller and less dense than diploid types, even in early stages of regrowth. Diploid types produce more tillers, have better stand persistence, and are typically more tolerant to heavy grazing.

Page 4: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

4

Tabl

e 3.

Sum

mar

y of

Ken

tuck

y al

falfa

yie

ld tr

ials

200

0-20

15 (y

ield

show

n as

a p

erce

ntag

e of

the

mea

n of

the

com

mer

cial

var

ietie

s in

the

test

). (R

R de

sign

ates

Rou

ndup

Rea

dy v

arie

ties)

Varie

tyPr

oprie

tor

Varie

ty C

hara

cter

istic

s1Le

xing

ton

Prin

ceto

nBo

wlin

g G

reen

2Ed

en

Shal

eM

ean7

(# tr

ials

)FD

Dis

ease

Res

ista

nce3

004,

502

0406

0811

1212

601

0508

0911

116

0306

03Bw

FwAn

PRR

APH

5yr8

5yr

5yr

7yr

6yr

4yr

3yr

3yr

4yr

5yr

5yr

6yr

4yr

5yr

3yr

4yr

4yr

A-44

40Pr

oduc

ers C

hoic

e4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

099

100(

2)A

5225

Prod

ucer

s Cho

ice

5HR

HRHR

HRR

104

107

106(

2)AC

Lon

gvie

wN

ewfie

ld S

eeds

–HR

––

––

83–

Adre

nalin

Bret

t You

ng S

eeds

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

104

–Al

fagr

aze3

00 R

RAm

eric

a’s A

lfalfa

3HR

RHR

HRHR

9310

094

96(3

)Am

erist

and

403T

Amer

ica’s

Alfa

lfa3

HRHR

HRHR

HR99

9110

197

9710

010

110

799

(8)

Amer

istan

d 40

3T P

lus

Amer

ica’s

Alfa

lfa4

HRHR

HRHR

HR94

–Am

erist

and

405T

RR

Amer

ica’s

Alfa

lfa4

HRHR

HRHR

HR98

9498

97(3

)Am

erist

and

407T

QAm

eric

a’s A

lfalfa

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

103

104

104(

2)Am

erist

and

433T

RR

Amer

ica’s

Alfa

lfa3

HRR

RHR

HR96

–Am

erist

and

445T

Q R

RAm

eric

a’s A

lfalfa

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

101

–An

chor

mat

ePr

oSee

d M

arke

ting

––

––

––

100

–Ap

haTr

on R

RCr

opla

n Ge

netic

s4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

0–

Arc

(cer

tified

)Pu

blic

4LR

MR

HR–

–91

9676

9393

9995

8698

92(9

)Ar

cher

III

Amer

ica’s

Alfa

lfa5

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

6–

Bara

lfa 5

3HR

Bare

nbru

g US

A5

HRR

HRHR

HR10

4–

Buffa

loPu

blic

––

––

––

9082

8680

8895

7887

8195

86(1

0)Bu

lldog

-505

Univ

. of G

A5

–HR

–R

–10

396

100(

2)Ca

liber

Beck

’s H

ybrid

s4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

099

100(

2)Ch

arge

rBe

ck’s

Hyb

rids

5HR

HRHR

HRHR

106

–Co

nsist

ency

4.1

0 RR

Crop

lan

Gene

tics

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

9910

610

110

2(3)

DK

140

Mon

sant

o4

HRHR

HRHR

HR95

100

98(2

)D

KA-4

1-18

RR

Mon

sant

o4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

699

9710

010

1(4)

DKA

43-

13M

onsa

nto

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

102

–D

KA 4

4-16

RR

Mon

sant

o4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

3–

DKA

50-

18M

onsa

nto

5HR

HRHR

HRHR

110

–D

G421

0Cr

op P

rodu

ctio

n4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

1–

Dyn

agro

Eve

rlast

Unite

d Ag

r. Pr

od.

4HR

HRHR

HRR

101

101

101(

2)En

forc

erFF

R/So

. Sta

tes.

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

9082

86(2

)Es

cala

deAl

lied

Seed

s5

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

6–

Ever

mor

eFF

R/So

. Sta

tes.

5HR

HRHR

HRHR

9810

510

110

310

2(4)

Expe

ditio

nN

EXGR

OW

5HR

HRR

RRR

107

112

9610

5(3)

Feas

t +EV

NEX

GRO

W3

HRHR

HRR

HR10

610

196

101(

3)FS

G 40

6Al

lied

Seed

s4

HRHR

HRHR

HR11

0–

FSG

408D

PAl

lied

Seed

s4

HRHR

HRHR

R10

511

010

8(2)

FSG

505

Allie

d Se

eds

5HR

HRHR

HRR

106

108

107(

2)FS

G 52

8SF

Lew

is Se

ed C

o.5

HRR

HRHR

R10

7–

Gene

vaN

EXGR

OW

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

106

103

104

104(

3)Ge

noa

NEX

GRO

W4

HRHR

HRRR

HR11

299

9811

810

7(4)

GH 7

44N

EXGR

OW

4HR

HRHR

HRM

R10

4–

Gunn

erCr

opla

n Ge

netic

s5

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

3–

Inte

grity

PGI A

lfalfa

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

101

–Ki

ngFi

sher

243

Cal/W

est

5HR

HRHR

HRHR

98–

King

fishe

r 402

0Le

gacy

See

ds4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

2–

L447

HDLe

gacy

See

ds4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

5–

L449

Aph2

Lega

cy S

eeds

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

97–

Lanc

erAl

lied

Seed

s4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

1–

Lege

nDai

ry 5

.0Cr

opla

n Ge

netic

s3

HRHR

HRHR

HR99

103

110

104(

3)M

arin

er II

IAl

lied

Seed

s4

HRHR

HRHR

HR99

–M

ount

aine

er 2

.0Cr

opla

n Ge

n.5

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

8–

PerF

orm

Dai

ryla

nd R

esea

rch

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

106

–PG

I 459

Prod

ucer

s Cho

ice

4HR

HRHR

HRR

102

–Ph

irst

UniS

outh

Gen

etic

s4

HRHR

HRHR

R10

510

210

4(2)

continued

Page 5: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

5

Tabl

e 3.

continued

Varie

tyPr

oprie

tor

Varie

ty C

hara

cter

istic

s1Le

xing

ton

Prin

ceto

nBo

wlin

g G

reen

2Ed

en

Shal

eM

ean7

(# tr

ials

)FD

Dis

ease

Res

ista

nce3

004,

502

0406

0811

1212

601

0508

0911

116

0306

03Bw

FwAn

PRR

APH

5yr8

5yr

5yr

7yr

6yr

4yr

3yr

3yr

4yr

5yr

5yr

6yr

4yr

5yr

3yr

4yr

4yr

Phoe

nix

FFR/

So. S

tate

s.5

HRHR

HRHR

R11

399

102

106

101

9496

102(

7)Ra

dian

ce H

DAm

pac

Seed

/Cisc

o4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

310

510

310

4(3)

Radi

ant-A

MAm

pac

Seed

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

97–

Rebo

und

5.0

Crop

lan

Gene

tics

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

103

103

108

104(

3)Re

boun

d 6.

0Cr

opla

n Ge

netic

s4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

410

110

3(2)

Rega

lGr

eat P

lain

s5

HRHR

RHR

MR

103

9499

(2)

Rew

ard

IIPG

I Alfa

lfa4

HRHR

RHR

R99

103

9410

310

0(4)

Sara

nac

AR (c

ertifi

ed)

Publ

ic4

MR

RHR

LR–

9387

7785

8695

9792

9588

9282

9989

9590

(15)

Stra

tica

RRCr

opla

n Ge

netic

s4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

2–

Sum

mer

Gol

dBe

ck’s

Hyb

rids

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

107

–Tr

iple

Trus

t 450

ABI A

lfalfa

5HR

HRHR

HRHR

100

105

103(

2)Tr

iple

Trus

t 500

Cent

ral F

arm

Sup

ply

5HR

HRHR

HRHR

106

–To

nnic

a RR

Crop

Gen

etic

s5

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

7–

USG

681H

YUn

iSou

th G

enet

ics

6HR

HRHR

HR–

113

–Ve

rnal

Publ

ic2

RM

R–

––

9395

94(2

)W

ithst

and

FFR/

So. S

tate

s.4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

090

9610

087

114

98(6

)W

L 31

9HQ

W-L

Res

earc

h3

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

8–

WL

327

W-L

Res

earc

h4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

5–

WL

338S

RW

-L R

esea

rch

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

101

–W

L 34

3HQ

W-L

Res

earc

h4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

111

010

010

4(3)

WL

348A

PW

-L R

esea

rch

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

99–

WL

354H

QW

-L R

esea

rch

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

115

–W

L 35

5 RR

W-L

Res

earc

h4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

399

100

102

101(

4)W

L 35

6HQ

RR

W-L

Res

earc

h5

HRHR

HRHR

HR95

–W

L 35

7HQ

W-L

Res

earc

h5

HRHR

HRHR

HR12

310

610

110

610

9(4)

WL

363H

QW

-L R

esea

rch

5HR

HRHR

HRHR

105

102

105

104(

3)W

L 37

2HQ

RR

W-L

Res

earc

h5

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

4–

4m76

FFR/

Sou.

St.

4.7

HRHR

RHR

R11

6–

4030

Bret

t You

ng S

eeds

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

102

–5-

star

Crop

lan

Gen.

5R

HRR

RR

9799

98(2

)53

H92

Pion

eer

3HR

HRHR

HRHR

97–

54R0

2 RR

Pion

eer

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

9810

510

510

3(3)

54Q

32Pi

onee

r4

HRHR

HRHR

HR97

–54

V46

Pion

eer

4R

HRHR

HRR

99–

55V4

8Pi

onee

r5

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

4–

55V5

0Pi

onee

r5

HRR

Hr

HRHR

109

–54

V54

Pion

eer

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

9894

105

99(3

)54

V56

Pion

eer

––

––

––

98–

6400

HTN

EXGR

OW

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

108

9610

2(2)

6415

NEX

GRO

W4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

310

510

4(2)

6417

NEX

GRO

W4

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

5–

6420

NEX

GRO

W4

HRR

HRR

HR10

6–

6422

QN

EXGR

OW

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

110

102

106(

2)65

16R

RRN

EXGR

OW

5HR

–HR

HRHR

106

–65

30N

EXGR

OW

5HR

HRHR

HRHR

92–

6552

NEX

GRO

W5

HRHR

HRHR

HR10

5–

1 Va

riety

cha

ract

erist

ics:

FD=f

all d

orm

ancy

, Bw

=bac

teria

l wilt

, Fw

=fus

ariu

m w

ilt, A

n=an

thra

cnos

e, P

RR=p

hyto

phth

ora

root

rot,

APH-

apha

nom

yces

root

rot.

Info

rmat

ion

prov

ided

by

seed

com

pani

es.

2 Th

e Bo

wlin

g Gr

een

test

is o

n so

il in

fest

ed w

ith p

hyto

phth

ora

and

apha

nom

yces

root

rots

.3

Dise

ase

resis

tanc

e: S

=sus

cept

ible

, LR=

low

resis

tanc

e, M

R=m

oder

ate

resis

tanc

e, R

=res

istan

ce, H

R=hi

gh re

sista

nce.

4 Ye

ar tr

ial w

as e

stab

lishe

d.5

Use

this

sum

mar

y ta

ble

as a

gui

de in

mak

ing

varie

ty d

ecisi

ons,

but r

efer

to sp

ecifi

c ye

arly

repo

rts t

o de

term

ine

stat

istic

al d

iffer

ence

s in

fora

ge y

ield

bet

wee

n va

rietie

s. To

find

act

ual y

ield

s, lo

ok in

the

year

ly re

port

for t

he fi

nal

year

of e

ach

spec

ific

test

. For

exa

mpl

e, th

e Le

xing

ton

tria

l pla

nted

in 2

008

was

har

vest

ed fo

r six

yea

rs, s

o th

e fin

al y

ield

repo

rt w

ould

be “

2013

Alfa

lfa R

epor

t” ar

chiv

ed in

the

KY F

orag

e w

ebsit

e at

ww

w.u

ky.e

du/A

g/Fo

rage

.6

This

is a

Roun

dup

Read

y al

falfa

tria

l.7

Mea

n on

ly p

rese

nted

whe

n re

spec

tive

varie

ty w

as in

clud

ed in

two

or m

ore

tria

ls.8

Num

ber o

f yea

rs o

f dat

a.

Page 6: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

6

Tabl

e 4.

Sum

mar

y of

Ken

tuck

y ta

ll fe

scue

yie

ld tr

ials

200

0-20

15 (y

ield

show

n as

a p

erce

ntag

e of

the

mea

n of

the

com

mer

cial

var

ietie

s in

the

tria

l).

Varie

tyPr

oprie

tor

Lexi

ngto

nPr

ince

ton

Qui

cksa

ndM

ean3

(#tr

ials

)01

1,2

0305

0709

1112

1300

0204

0608

1012

0103

0513

3-yr

42-

yr3-

yr3-

yr3-

yr3-

yr3-

yr2-

yr2-

yr3-

yr3-

yr3-

yr3-

yr3-

yr3-

yr2-

yr2-

yr4-

yr2-

yrAt

las S

elec

tPr

oSee

ds M

arke

ting

95–

April

iaPr

oSee

ds M

arke

ting

93–

BarE

lite

Bare

nbru

g US

A96

100

9295

(3)

Baria

neBa

renb

rug

USA

8799

9594

(3)

Baro

lex

Bare

nbru

g US

A90

–Ba

rOpt

ima

PLUS

E34

5Ba

renb

rug

USA

122

9910

710

810

599

100

9410

4(8)

Bron

son

Ampa

c Se

ed88

9710

510

299

9610

191

102

98(9

)Bu

llIm

prov

ed F

orag

es98

102

100

102

104

9997

9610

0(8)

Caju

n II

Smith

See

d Se

rvic

es97

100

101

8495

(4)

Carm

ine

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l99

9798

(2)

Cow

girl

Rose

-Agr

iSee

ds94

102

100

9899

(4)

Dur

aMax

GO

LD5

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l10

210

610

4(2)

Enha

nce

Allie

d Se

ed93

107

100(

2)Es

tanc

ia A

rkSh

ield

5M

ount

ain

View

See

ds10

210

610

110

210

3(4)

Fest

ival

Pick

seed

Wes

t10

710

210

710

5(3)

Flou

rish

Allie

d Se

ed92

101

97(2

)Go

liath

Ampa

c Se

ed10

010

399

101(

3)Ho

edow

nD

LF In

tern

atio

nal

104

106

105(

2)H

yMar

kFr

aser

See

ds91

102

97(2

)Je

sup

EFPe

nnin

gton

See

d98

105

103

100

102(

4)Je

sup

Max

Q5

Penn

ingt

on S

eed

9810

111

010

310

097

9495

100

9810

010

210

210

0(13

)Jo

hnst

one

ProS

eeds

Mar

ketin

g10

8–

KEN

HYKY

Agr

ic E

xp S

ta.

89–

Kent

ucky

32

Ore

gro

Seed

s93

9498

9410

196

(5)

Koka

nee

Ampa

c Se

ed89

8688

(2)

KY31

+5KY

Agr

ic E

xp S

ta.

118

112

108

102

102

9395

104

108

104

104

9311

210

112

498

110

108

105(

18)

Lace

field

Max

Q II

5Pe

nnin

gton

See

d10

996

101

106

114

105(

5)M

axim

ize

Turf

-See

d95

9397

(4)

Mar

tin2

6475

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l10

4–

Nan

ryo

Jap.

Gra

ssla

nd F

orag

eSee

d/

USDA

-ARS

, El R

eno,

OK

96–

Nor

iaPr

oSee

ds M

arke

ting

98–

RAD

-ERF

50Ra

dix

Rese

arch

, Inc

.11

3–

Reso

lute

Ampa

c Se

ed90

6578

(2)

Savo

ryD

LF In

tern

atio

nal

91–

Sein

eAd

vant

a Se

eds

96–

Sele

ctFF

R/So

u. S

t.10

694

9999

9890

100

100

105

9710

510

210

599

100

112

102

9110

310

0(19

)St

ockm

anSe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

R10

810

197

105

103(

4)Te

ton

IIM

ount

ain

View

See

ds10

710

599

103(

3)Te

xom

a M

axQ

II5

Penn

ingt

on S

eed

95–

TF02

03G

Seed

Res

earc

h of

OR

87–

Tow

er 6

475

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l98

–Tu

scan

yFo

rage

Gen

etic

s11

2–

Tusc

any

IISe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

R97

9810

610

0(3)

5CAN

Bret

t You

ng86

–1

Year

tria

l was

est

ablis

hed.

2 Us

e th

is su

mm

ary

tabl

e as

a g

uide

in m

akin

g va

riety

dec

ision

s, bu

t ref

er to

spec

ific

year

ly re

port

s to

dete

rmin

e st

atist

ical

diff

eren

ces i

n fo

rage

yie

ld b

etw

een

varie

ties.

To fi

nd a

ctua

l yie

lds,

look

in th

e ye

arly

repo

rt

for t

he fi

nal y

ear o

f eac

h sp

ecifi

c tr

ial.

For e

xam

ple,

the

Lexi

ngto

n tr

ial p

lant

ed in

201

2 w

as h

arve

sted

two

year

s, so

the

final

repo

rt w

ould

be “

2015

Tall

Fesc

ue R

epor

t” ar

chiv

ed in

the

KY F

orag

e w

ebsit

e at

ww

w.u

ky.

edu/

Ag/F

orag

e.3

Mea

n on

ly p

rese

nted

whe

n re

spec

tive

varie

ty w

as in

clud

ed in

two

or m

ore

tria

ls.4

Num

ber o

f yea

rs o

f dat

a.5

KY31

+ co

ntai

ns th

e to

xic

endo

phyt

e. Je

sup

Max

Q, Te

xom

a M

axQ

II, L

acefi

eld

Max

Q II

, Dur

aMax

GO

LD, M

artin

2 64

7, To

wer

647

and

Est

anci

a Ar

kshi

eld

cont

ain

a co

ntai

n a

non-

toxi

c en

doph

yte.

Bar

Opt

ima

PLUS

E34

co

ntai

ns a

ben

efici

al e

ndop

hyte

. The

oth

er fe

scue

var

ietie

s in

this

tabl

e do

not

cont

ain

an e

ndop

hyte

.

Page 7: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

7

Tabl

e 5.

Sum

mar

y of

Ken

tuck

y or

char

dgra

ss y

ield

tria

ls 2

002-

2015

(yie

ld sh

own

as a

per

cent

age

of th

e m

ean

of th

e co

mm

erci

al v

arie

ties i

n th

e tr

ial).

Varie

tyPr

oprie

tor

Lexi

ngto

nPr

ince

ton

Qui

cksa

ndM

ean3

(#tr

ials

)20

031,

220

0620

0720

0920

1120

1220

1320

0220

0420

0620

0820

1020

1220

0320

0520

1020

133-

yr4

4-yr

3-yr

3-yr

3-yr

3-yr

2-yr

3-yr

3-yr

3-yr

3-yr

3-yr

3-yr

3-yr

4-yr

3-yr

2-yr

Aber

top

Penn

ingt

on71

–Am

bass

ador

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l See

ds95

–Am

bros

iaAm

eric

an G

rass

See

d Pr

od.

90–

Benc

hmar

kFF

R/So

u. S

t.11

3–

Benc

hmar

k Pl

usFF

R/So

u. S

t.10

010

810

510

697

103

107

107

104

102

107

107

102

9410

310

3(15

)Bo

unty

Allie

d Se

ed10

198

100(

2)Ce

ntur

ySe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

rego

n98

104

101(

2)Ch

eckm

ate

Seed

Res

earc

h of

Ore

gon

102

117

106

108(

3)Ch

risto

ssPr

osee

ds M

arke

ting

92–

Com

man

dSe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

rego

n87

–Cr

own

Don

ley

Seed

9710

110

510

1(3)

Crow

n Ro

yale

Plu

sD

onle

y Se

ed10

897

103(

2)El

iseRo

se-A

griS

eed

8698

9894

(3)

Endu

ranc

eD

LF In

tern

atio

nal S

eeds

104

–Ex

tend

Allie

d Se

ed10

710

010

510

810

5(4)

Hallm

ark

Jam

es V

anLe

euw

en10

210

398

9610

0(4)

Harv

esta

rCo

lum

bia

Seed

s91

9793

106

100

9899

(6)

Haym

aste

rFF

R/So

u. S

t.94

102

9798

(3)

Haym

ate

FFR/

Sou.

St.

106

103

105(

2)Ic

onSe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

rego

n10

598

102(

2)In

tens

ivBa

renb

rug

102

–La

zuly

Pros

eeds

Mar

ketin

g97

–LG

-31

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l See

ds92

–M

egab

iteTu

rf-S

eed

106

–N

iva

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l See

ds81

–Pa

iute

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l See

ds10

8–

Pers

istSm

ith S

eed

123

105

106

107

112

106

101

101

105

102

108

101

102

9810

6(14

)Po

tom

acPu

blic

103

9697

102

9810

810

198

9411

510

0(10

)Pr

airie

Turn

er S

eed

107

101

109

106

113

125

104

100

104

9910

410

510

712

010

410

7(15

)Pr

odig

yCa

udill

See

d10

199

9910

310

194

100(

6)Pr

ofit

Ampa

c Se

ed10

796

9810

394

103

102

102

115

100

102(

10)

RAD

-LCF

25

Radi

x Re

sear

ch99

102

101(

2)Sh

awne

eRo

se-A

griS

eed

86–

Shilo

h II

Pros

eeds

Mar

ketin

g11

7–

Take

naSm

ith S

eed

100

–Te

kena

IISm

ith S

eed

110

102

109

106

104

106(

5)Te

kapo

Ampa

c Se

ed91

8182

7882

8198

8692

8210

591

8188

87(1

4)Tu

cker

Ore

gro

Seed

s96

9610

296

8595

(5)

Udde

rIm

prov

ed F

orag

es10

010

710

210

699

103(

5)Va

illia

ntPr

osee

ds M

arke

ting

96–

Visio

nCr

opm

ark

Seed

s63

6765

(2)

1 Ye

ar tr

ial w

as e

stab

lishe

d.2

Use

this

sum

mar

y ta

ble

as a

gui

de in

mak

ing

varie

ty d

ecisi

ons,

but r

efer

to sp

ecifi

c ye

arly

repo

rts t

o de

term

ine

stat

istic

al d

iffer

ence

s in

fora

ge y

ield

bet

wee

n va

rietie

s. To

find

act

ual y

ield

s, lo

ok in

the

year

ly

repo

rt fo

r the

fina

l yea

r of e

ach

spec

ific

tria

l. Fo

r exa

mpl

e, th

e Le

xing

ton

tria

l pla

nted

in 2

012

was

har

vest

ed th

ree

year

s, so

the

final

repo

rt w

ould

be “

2015

Orc

hard

gras

s Rep

ort”

arch

ived

in th

e KY

For

age

web

site

at w

ww

.uky

.edu

/Ag/

Fora

ge.

3 M

ean

only

pre

sent

ed w

hen

resp

ectiv

e va

riety

was

incl

uded

in tw

o or

mor

e tr

ials.

4 N

umbe

r of y

ears

of d

ata.

Page 8: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

8

Tabl

e 6.

Sum

mar

y of

Ken

tuck

y an

nual

ryeg

rass

yie

ld tr

ials

200

0-20

15 (y

ield

show

n as

a p

erce

ntag

e of

the

yiel

d va

lue

of M

arsh

all).

Varie

tyTy

pePr

oprie

tor

Lexi

ngto

n1Pr

ince

ton

Bow

ling

Gre

enM

ean4

(#tr

ials

)03

2,3

0405

0607

0809

1010

1111

1212

1314

0002

0003

Abun

dant

tetr

aplo

idAm

pac

Seed

12–

Acro

bat

–Pr

osee

ds M

arke

ting

144

–AE

110

Wes

terw

old

tetr

aplo

idPi

ckse

ed U

SA, I

nc.

8910

095

(2)

Amp

Wes

terw

old

tetr

aplo

idCo

lum

bia

Seed

s76

–An

dyW

este

rwol

d te

trap

loid

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l97

–As

sist

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Sadd

leBu

tte

90–

Atta

inW

este

rwol

d te

trap

loid

Smith

See

d Se

rvic

es11

153

6990

(2)

Avan

ceW

este

rwol

d di

ploi

dD

LF In

tern

atio

nal

107

–Ba

rext

raIta

lian

tetr

aplo

idBa

renb

rug

USA

121

–Ba

rmul

tra

IIIta

lian

tetr

aplo

idBa

renb

rug

USA

133

103

9911

8(2)

Big

Bang

–Br

ett Y

oung

67–

Big

Boss

Wes

terw

old

tetr

aplo

idSm

ith S

eed

Serv

ices

9886

3873

86(3

)Bi

g D

addy

Wes

terw

old

tetr

aplo

idFF

R/So

u. S

t.86

9882

8887

9189

(6)

Bill

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Smith

See

d Se

rvic

es62

–Br

angu

sIta

lian

dipl

oid

KB S

eedS

olut

ions

94–

Brui

ser

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Ampa

c Se

ed65

105

100

104

8610

010

594

(6)

Com

mon

–Pu

blic

8387

8482

84(4

)Ce

ntur

ion

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Mou

ntai

n Vi

ew S

eeds

9713

211

5(2)

DH-

3Ita

lian

tetr

aplo

idAl

lied

Seed

9127

8969

(3)

Dia

mon

d T

Italia

n te

trap

loid

Ore

gro

Seed

s8

–D

ixie

Gol

dW

este

rwol

d te

trap

loid

Caud

ill S

eed

20–

Dom

ino

Italia

n te

trap

loid

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l12

0–

Dyn

a-Ga

inW

este

rwol

d di

ploi

dCo

lum

bia

Seed

s72

–Ed

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Smith

See

d Se

rvic

es96

102

100

98(2

)Fa

ntas

ticW

este

rwol

d di

ploi

dAm

pac

Seed

4884

8885

86(3

)Fe

ast I

IIta

lian

tetr

aplo

idAm

pac

Seed

3511

310

981

9371

5356

127

86(8

)Fl

ying

AW

este

rwol

d di

ploi

dO

regr

o Se

eds

3959

–Fo

xIta

lian

dipl

oid

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l10

9–

Fria

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Allie

d Se

ed95

8789

103

8188

(4)

GR-A

S10

Italia

nAm

pac

Seed

113

–continued Timothy (Phleum pratense) is the

fourth most widely sown cool-season perennial grass used in Kentucky for forage after tall fescue, orchardgrass, and Kentucky bluegrass. Timothy is primarily harvested as hay, particularly for horses. In Kentucky, timothy behaves like a short-lived perennial, with stands usually lasting two years. Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) is a high-quality, highly palatable, long-lived pasture plant with limited use for hay. It tolerates close, frequent grazing better than most grasses. It has low yields and low summer production and becomes dormant and brown during hot, dry sum-mers. Kentucky bluegrass is best suited for pastures where a dense sod is more important than high-forage production (e.g., horse pastures). Festuloliums are hybrids between vari-ous fescues and ryegrasses with higher quality than tall fescue and improved stand survival over perennial ryegrass. Their use in Kentucky is limited because they do not survive as long as tall fescue. Newer varieties show promise where high quality and yield are more impor-tant than long term persistence. Sudangrass (Sorghum bicolor ssp. drummondi) is a rapidly growing annual grass in the sorghum family. It is medium yielding and well suited for grazing or hay because of its smaller stem size. Su-dangrass regrows quickly after harvest and can be grazed several times during summer and early fall. Sorghum-sudangrass hybrids are more vigorous and slightly higher yielding than sudangrass. A larger stem size makes these hybrids less useful for hay; there-fore, they are commonly used for baleage and grazing.BMR (Brown Mid-rib) sudangrass and BMR sorghum-sudangrass varieties have been developed. See tables 11 and 12 for information. Pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) is the most widely grown type of millet. It is well adapted to production systems characterized by drought, low soil fertil-ity, and high temperature. It is higher yielding than foxtail millet and regrows rapidly after harvest if an 8- to 10-inch stubble height is left. Dwarf varieties, which are leafier and better suited for grazing, are available.

Page 9: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

9

Tabl

e 6.

continued

Varie

tyTy

pePr

oprie

tor

Lexi

ngto

n1Pr

ince

ton

Bow

ling

Gre

enM

ean4

(#tr

ials

)03

2,3

0405

0607

0809

1010

1111

1212

1314

0002

0003

Graz

e-N

-Gro

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Seed

Res

earc

h of

OR

114

6710

094

(3)

Gree

n Fa

rmW

este

rwol

d di

ploi

dSm

ith S

eed

Serv

ices

85–

Gulf

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Publ

ic67

2687

7876

7227

6979

7976

71(1

0)He

rcul

esW

este

rwol

d te

trap

loid

Bare

nbru

g US

A91

7410

810

0(2)

HS-1

Italia

n di

ploi

dKB

See

dSol

utio

ns72

–Ja

ckso

nW

este

rwol

d di

ploi

dTh

e W

ax C

o.66

100

6210

359

101

9910

610

691

9177

7010

090

9091

(14)

Jum

boW

este

rwol

d te

trap

loid

Bare

nbru

g US

A11

297

105(

2)KB

Roy

alIta

lian

dipl

oid

KB S

eedS

olut

ions

83–

Kosp

eed

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Smith

See

d Se

rvic

es80

–Ko

win

early

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Smith

See

d Se

rvic

es95

–LH

T-10

2In

term

edia

teAm

pac

Seed

100

–M

arsh

all

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

The

Wax

Co.

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100(

17)

Max

imo

Inte

rmed

iate

tetr

aplo

idPi

ckse

ed U

SA, I

nc.

101

–M

eroa

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Smith

See

d Se

rvic

es93

–M

X 10

8W

este

rwol

d te

trap

loid

Pick

seed

USA

, Inc

.95

114

105(

2)N

elso

nW

este

rwol

d te

trap

loid

The

Wax

Co.

8688

9365

7786

(4)

Pass

erel

Plu

sW

este

rwol

d di

ploi

dPe

nnin

gton

See

d10

3–

Prim

ecut

Wes

terw

old

bran

dO

regr

o Se

eds

94–

Rio

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

–98

9990

96(3

)Sp

ark

tetr

aplo

idD

LF In

tern

atio

nal

73–

Stoc

kaid

dipl

oid

–82

–St

riker

Wes

terw

old

tetr

aplo

idSe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

R90

–TA

MTB

OIta

lian

tetr

aplo

idTe

x. A

g Ex

p St

a.47

101

108

9579

86(5

)Ta

m 9

0Ita

lian

dipl

oid

Tex.

Ag

Exp

Sta.

4978

8872

(3)

Tetr

aPrim

eIta

lian

tetr

aplo

idM

ount

ain

View

See

ds10

196

99(2

)Te

traP

roIta

lian

tetr

aplo

idTe

x. A

g Ex

p St

a.40

–Ti

llage

Root

Max

Wes

terw

old

dipl

oid

Cove

r Cro

p So

lutio

ns82

9086

(2)

Tilla

geM

ax-B

risto

l5W

este

rwol

d di

ploi

dCo

ver C

rop

Solu

tions

9091

91(2

)Ti

llage

Max

-INDY

5W

este

rwol

d di

ploi

dCo

ver C

rop

Solu

tions

8990

90(2

)T-

Rex

Wes

terw

old

tetr

aplo

idSa

ddle

Butt

e11

–Ve

rdur

eW

este

rwol

d te

trap

loid

Smith

See

d Se

rvic

es86

4358

72(2

)W

inte

rhaw

kW

este

rwol

d di

ploi

dO

regr

o Se

eds

104

117

9211

910

8(4)

Win

ter S

tar

Italia

n te

trap

loid

Ampa

c Se

ed99

–Zo

rroIta

lian

tetr

aplo

idD

LF In

tern

atio

nal

132

134

104

123(

3)1

In a

nnua

l rye

gras

s, lo

w y

ield

ing

varie

ties u

sual

ly re

sult

from

win

terk

ill. N

ote:

Due

to se

vere

win

terk

ill, y

ield

resu

lts fr

om th

e 20

06 a

nd 2

013

plan

tings

wer

e no

t inc

lude

d in

the

over

all m

ean.

2

Year

tria

l was

est

ablis

hed.

3 Us

e th

is su

mm

ary

tabl

e as

a g

uide

in m

akin

g va

riety

dec

ision

s, bu

t ref

er to

spec

ific

year

ly re

port

s to

dete

rmin

e st

atist

ical

diff

eren

ces i

n fo

rage

yie

ld b

etw

een

varie

ties.

To fi

nd a

ctua

l yie

lds,

look

in th

e ye

arly

repo

rt fo

r the

fina

l ye

ar o

f eac

h sp

ecifi

c tr

ial.

For e

xam

ple,

the

Lexi

ngto

n tr

ial p

lant

ed in

201

4 w

as h

arve

sted

one

yea

r, so

the

final

repo

rt w

ould

be “

2015

Ann

ual a

nd P

eren

nial

Rye

gras

s and

Fes

tulo

lium

Rep

ort”

arch

ived

in th

e KY

For

age

web

site

at w

ww

.uky

.edu

/Ag/

Fora

ge.

4 M

ean

only

pre

sent

ed w

hen

resp

ectiv

e va

riety

was

incl

uded

in tw

o or

mor

e tr

ials.

5 Th

ese

are

Tilla

geRo

otM

ax th

at in

clud

ed c

rimso

n cl

over

and

/or t

illag

e ra

dish

.

Page 10: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

10

Table 7. Summary of Kentucky Timothy Yield Trials 2000-2015 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).

Variety Proprietor/KY Distributor

Lexington Quicksand PrincetonMean3

(#trials)001,2 01 02 06 07 08 09 11 12 13 99 01 00 042yr4 3yr 4yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 2yr 2yr 2yr 3yr 2yr

Alma Newfield Seeds Co/Caudill Seed Co.

81 –

Auroro General Feed and Grain 100 98 99(2)Barfleo Barenbrug USA 95 91 101 96(3)Barpenta Barenbrug USA 74 82 82 79(3)Clair Ky Agric. Exp. Station 109 115 107 95 108 104 112 99 103 108 122 107(11)Classic Cebeco International Seeds 100 88 87 92(3)Climax Canada Agr. Res. Station 79 102 105 98 102 100 85 96(7)Colt FFR Cooperative 105 101 90 112 99 101(5)Common Public 96 –Comtral Caudill Seed 92 96 94(2)Derby FFR Cooperative 112 111 106 112 108 112 124 112(7)Dolina DLF International 100 91 96(2)Express Seed Research of Oregon 97 91 97 95 95(4)Hokuei Snow Brand Seed 103 –Hokusei Snow Brand Seed 97 99 98(2)Joliette Newfield Seeds Co/Caudill

Seed Co.87 89 90 89(3)

Jonaton Newfield Seeds Co/Caudill Seed Co.

84 –

Outlaw Grassland West Company 107 –Richmond Pickseed Canada Inc. 100 103 102(2)Summergraze Brett Young 96 –Summit Allied Seed, L.L.C. 114 –Talon Seed Research of Oregon 110 112 108 106 109 109(5)Treasure Seed Research of Oregon 103 115 103 101 108 106(5)Tundra DLF International 95 –Tuukka Ampac Seed Company 95 90 92 93 93(4)Zenyatta DLF International 107 –

1 Year trial was established.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in forage yield between varieties.

To find actual yields, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 2012 was harvested three years, so the final report would be “2015 Timothy and Kentucky Bluegrass Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage.

3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.4 Number of years of data.

Table 8. Summary of Kentucky Bluegrass Yield Trials at Lexington 1996-2015 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).

VarietyProprietor/KY Distributor

961,2 03 04 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 Mean3

(#trials)3yr4 2yr 3yr 4yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 2yrAdam 1 Radix Research 98 –Barderby Barenbrug USA 94 101 91 98 87 104 96(6)Big Blue Rose-AgriSeed 82 95 89(2)Common Public 71 66 68 68(3)Ginger ProSeeds Marketing 89 118 119 114 118 112 107 110 104 110(9)Kenblue Public 90 102 133 96 95 118 95 104(7)Lato Turf Seed Inc. 110 122 116(2)Park (certified) Public 90 98 94(2)RAD-5 Radix Research 103 –RAD-339 Radix Research 101 –RAD-643 Radix Research 94 –RAD-731zx Radix Research 87 –RAD-762 Radix Research 94 –RAD-1039 Radix Research 118 –Slezanka DLF International Seeds 111 –

1 Year trial was established.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in forage yield between varieties.

To find actual yields, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 2012 was harvested three years, so the final report would be “2015 Timothy and Kentucky Bluegrass Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage. The 96 and 03 Lexington results are in the appropriate Tall Fescue Reports.

3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.4 Number of years of data.

Page 11: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

11

Teff, also referred to as Summer Loveg-rass (Eragrostis tef ), is a warm-season annual grass native to Ethiopia and has been used as a grain crop for thousands of years. Recently, there has been consider-able interest in teff as a forage crop. It is high quality, palatable, and fine stemmed and therefore makes excellent hay.

Important Selection Considerations Local adaptation and seasonal yield. Choose a variety/species that is adapted to your region of Kentucky, as indicated by good performance across years and locations in replicated yield trials. Also, look for varieties that are productive in the desired season of use. For manage-ment recommendations, check with your county Extension agent or see the forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage. The following comprehensive bul-letins may be especially useful:

y Grain and Forage Crop Guide for Ken-tucky (AGR-18)

y Establishing Forage Crops (AGR-64) y Rotational Grazing (ID-143) y Extending Grazing and Reducing

Stored Feed Needs (AGR-199) y Forage Identification and Use Guide

(AGR-175) y Lime and Fertilizer Recommendations

(AGR-1) Seed quality. Buy premium-quality seed that is high in germination and purity and free from weed seed. Buy certified seed or proprietary seed of an improved variety. An improved variety is one that has performed well in inde-pendent trials. Other information on the label will include the test date (which must be within the past nine months), the level of germination, and the amount of other crop and weed seed. Order seed well in advance of planting time to assure that it will be available when needed.

Description of the Tests Yield trials. Plots were seeded at the recommended seeding rate per acre and were planted into a prepared seedbed with a disk drill. Plots were 5 feet by 15 feet in a randomized complete block

design with four replications. Grass plots were typically fertilized with 60 pounds of actual N per acre in March, after the first cutting, and again in late summer for a total of 180 pounds per acre per season. Other fertilizers (lime, P, and K) were applied as needed according to the University of Kentucky soil test recom-mendations. The tests were harvested us-ing a sickle-type forage plot harvester to simulate a spring cut hay/summer graz-ing/fall stockpile management system. Fresh weight samples were taken at each harvest to calculate percent dry matter production. Management practices for establishment, fertility, weed control, and harvest timing were in accordance with University of Kentucky recommenda-tions. Grazing trials. Plots were 5 feet by 15 feet in a randomized complete block design, with each variety replicated six times. Plots were seeded at the recom-mended seeding rate per acre and were planted into a prepared seedbed using a disk drill. Grazing was continuous from April to October. Plots were grazed down to below 4 inches quickly and were maintained at 2 to 4 inches (sometimes less) for the remainder of the grazing season. Supplemental hay was fed during periods of slowest growth. Visual ratings of per-cent stand were made in the fall several weeks after the cattle were removed to check stand survival after the grazing season and in the spring prior to grazing to check on winter survival and spring growth. Because trials were seeded in rows, persistence ratings were based on density within a row and not total ground cover. Grass plots were fertilized with 60 pounds of actual N per acre in the spring and 30 to 40 pounds of actual N in early November after cattle or horses were re-moved from the pasture. Other fertilizers (lime, P, and K) were applied as needed according to the University of Kentucky soil test recommendations. Management practices for establishment, fertility, and weed control were in accordance with University of Kentucky recommenda-tions.

Results and Discussion These tables summarize long-term yield and stand persistence data of com-mercial varieties that have been entered in the University of Kentucky trials. The data are listed as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties entered in each specific trial. In other words, the mean for each trial is 100 percent; vari-eties with percentages over 100 yielded better than average, and varieties with percentages less than 100 yielded lower than average. For the grazing trials, vari-eties with percentages over 100 persisted better than average, and varieties with percentages less than 100 persisted less than average. Also in the grazing trials, the alfalfa varieties were compared to Alfagraze, and the fescue varieties were compared to KY31+ instead of the mean of all the commercial varieties. In the horse grazing trials, the fescue varieties were compared to KY31- instead of the mean of all the commercial varieties. Direct, statistical comparisons of variet-ies cannot be made using the summary tables, but these comparisons do help to identify varieties for further consid-eration. Varieties that have performed better than average over many years and at several locations have very stable performance; others may have performed very well in wet years or on particular soil types. These details may influence variety choice, and the information can be found in the yearly reports. To deter-mine to which yearly report to refer, see the footnote in each table.

Summary Selecting a good forage variety is an important first step in establishing a productive stand of forage. Proper management, beginning with seedbed preparation and continuing throughout the life of the stand, is necessary for even the highest-yielding variety to produce to its genetic potential. For more detailed information on yield and grazing toler-ance within species, go to individual 2015 reports on the forage Web site. See below for specific reports. The forage Web site contains all reports from 2001 through 2015.

Page 12: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

12

Tabl

e 9.

Sum

mar

y of

Ken

tuck

y pe

renn

ial r

yegr

ass y

ield

tria

ls 1

999-

2015

(yie

ld sh

own

as a

per

cent

age

of th

e m

ean

of th

e co

mm

erci

al v

arie

ties i

n th

e tr

ial).

Varie

tyTy

pePr

oprie

tor

Lexi

ngto

nPr

ince

ton

Bow

ling

Gre

enM

ean3,

4

(#tr

ials

)99

1,2

0103

0405

0607

0809

1011

1213

0002

0003

2yr5

2yr

2yr

3yr

3yr

2yr

3yr

3yr

3yr

2yr

3yr

3yr

2yr

2yr

3yr

2yr

2yr

Aire

sdi

ploi

dAm

pac

Seed

9593

94(2

)Am

azon

tetr

aplo

idAg

riBio

Tech

108

9910

710

4(3)

Anac

onda

tetr

aplo

idCa

udill

See

d11

395

103

104(

3)Au

bisq

uete

trap

loid

Seed

Res

earc

h of

OR

144

9912

2(2)

Band

itte

trap

loid

Gras

sland

Wes

t10

611

411

0(2)

Bast

ion

C-2

tetr

aplo

idSe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

R91

–Be

stfo

rte

trap

loid

Impr

oved

For

ages

113

107

120

113(

3)Be

st fo

r Plu

shy

brid

tetr

aplo

idIm

prov

ed F

orag

es11

610

811

813

612

0(4)

BG-3

4di

ploi

dBa

renb

rug

USA

8385

8687

9086

(5)

Biso

nhy

brid

tetr

aplo

idIn

tern

atio

nal S

eeds

140

–Bo

ost

tetr

aplo

idAl

lied

Seed

130

125

120

143

110

103

109

120(

7)Bo

xer

tetr

aplo

idAg

riBio

Tech

121

106

114(

2)Ca

libra

tetr

aplo

idD

LF In

tern

atio

nal

9610

981

9910

395

112

101(

7)CA

S M

P64

dipl

oid

Casc

ade

Inte

rnat

iona

l97

–Ci

tade

lte

trap

loid

Ag C

anad

a10

194

113

103

103(

4)Cr

ave

tetr

aplo

idAm

pac

Seed

95–

Der

by–

Publ

ic74

–El

ena

DS

tetr

aplo

idAl

lied

Seed

110

–Eu

rost

arte

trap

loid

Seed

Res

earc

h of

OR

112

–Ev

erla

stdi

ploi

dCa

udill

See

d10

0–

Feed

erdi

ploi

dSe

ed R

esea

rch

of O

R76

–Gr

and

Dad

dyte

trap

loid

Smith

See

d11

810

110

976

9284

8611

197

(8)

Gree

n Go

ldte

trap

loid

Gras

sland

s Ore

gon

96–

Herb

al–

ProS

eeds

Mar

ketin

g77

–Im

pres

sario

tetr

aplo

idD

LF In

tern

atio

nal

107

9210

0(2)

Kent

aur

tetr

aplo

idD

LF In

tern

atio

nal

106

110

108(

2)La

ctal

tetr

aplo

idBr

ett Y

oung

102

–La

sso

dipl

oid

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l98

–continuedYield and Grazing

Tolerance Reports Individual forage species reports can be found at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage/ForageVarietyTrials2.htm.

y 2015 Alfalfa Report (PR-694) y 2015 Red and White Clover Report

(PR-695) y 2015 Orchardgrass Report (PR-696) y 2015 Tall Fescue and Bromegrass Re-

port (PR-697) y 2015 Timothy and Kentucky Bluegrass

Report (PR-698) y 2015 Annual and Perennial Ryegrass

and Festulolium Report (PR-699) y 2015 Alfalfa Grazing Tolerance Report

(PR-700) y 2015 Red and White Clover Grazing

Tolerance Report (PR-701) y 2015 Cool-Season Grass Grazing Toler-

ance Report (PR-702) y 2015 Cool-Season Grass Horse Grazing

Report (PR-703) y 2015 Annual Grass Report: Warm Sea-

son and Cool Season (Cereals) (PR-704) y 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky

Forage Variety Trials (PR-705)

About the Authors G.L. Olson is a research specialist and S.R. Smith is an Extension professor of Forages.

Page 13: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

13

Tabl

e 9.

continued

Varie

tyTy

pePr

oprie

tor

Lexi

ngto

nPr

ince

ton

Bow

ling

Gre

enM

ean3,

4

(#tr

ials

)99

1,2

0103

0405

0607

0809

1011

1213

0002

0003

2yr5

2yr

2yr

3yr

3yr

2yr

3yr

3yr

3yr

2yr

3yr

3yr

2yr

2yr

3yr

2yr

2yr

LHT-

102

tetr

aplo

idAm

pac

Seed

114

–Li

nndi

ploi

dPu

blic

8798

9810

298

8584

101

9293

8088

8788

7791

(15)

Man

hatt

endi

ploi

dPu

blic

85–

Mar

adi

ploi

dBa

renb

rug

USA

85–

Mat

rixdi

ploi

dCr

opm

ark

seed

s77

64–

Mav

eric

k Go

ldhy

brid

tetr

aplo

idAm

pac

Seed

9771

84(2

)O

rant

asdi

ploi

dD

LF In

tern

atio

nal

82–

Ort

ette

trap

loid

Ore

gro

Seed

s11

4–

PayD

ayte

trap

loid

Mou

ntai

n Vi

ew S

eeds

101

106

104(

2)Po

lly II

tetr

aplo

idFF

R/So

u. S

t.10

411

012

511

3(3)

Polly

Plu

shy

brid

tetr

aplo

idAl

lied

Seed

6460

62(2

)Po

wer

tetr

aplo

idAm

pac

Seed

110

103

102

100

109

104

105(

6)Po

limte

trap

loid

DLF

Inte

rnat

iona

l10

6–

Qua

rter

mas

ter

tetr

aplo

idRa

dix

Rese

arch

122

–Q

uart

ette

trap

loid

Ampa

c Se

ed97

5646

113

78(4

)RA

D-C

PS21

2hy

brid

tetr

aplo

idRa

dix

Rese

arch

134

–RA

D-M

I125

hybr

id te

trap

loid

Mou

ntai

n Vi

ew S

eeds

120

–Sa

mps

ondi

ploi

dIn

tern

atio

nal S

eeds

87–

Sier

radi

ploi

dLe

wis

Seed

Co.

89–

Tetr

aGai

nte

trap

loid

Pure

See

d11

1–

Tetr

aMag

tetr

aplo

idM

ount

ain

View

See

ds11

0–

Tong

ate

trap

loid

King

s Agr

iSee

ds96

103

100(

2)

Vers

eka

tetr

aplo

idAl

lied

Seed

75–

Vict

oria

ndi

ploi

dCa

udill

See

d10

0Ya

tsyn

dipl

oid

Bare

nbru

g US

A80

8985

(2)

1 Ye

ar tr

ial w

as e

stab

lishe

d.2

Use

this

sum

mar

y ta

ble

as a

gui

de in

mak

ing

varie

ty d

ecisi

ons,

but r

efer

to sp

ecifi

c ye

arly

repo

rts t

o de

term

ine

stat

istic

al d

iffer

ence

s in

fora

ge y

ield

bet

wee

n va

rietie

s. To

find

act

ual y

ield

s, lo

ok in

the

year

ly

repo

rt fo

r the

fina

l yea

r of e

ach

spec

ific

tria

l. Fo

r exa

mpl

e, th

e Le

xing

ton

tria

l pla

nted

in 2

012

was

har

vest

ed th

ree

year

s, so

the

final

repo

rt w

ould

be “

2015

Ann

ual a

nd P

eren

nial

Rye

gras

s and

Fes

tulo

lium

Re

port

” arc

hive

d in

the

KY F

orag

e w

ebsit

e at

ww

w.u

ky.e

du/A

g/Fo

rage

.3

Mea

n on

ly p

rese

nted

whe

n re

spec

tive

varie

ty w

as in

clud

ed in

two

or m

ore

tria

ls.4

In p

eren

nial

ryeg

rass

, low

yie

ldin

g va

rietie

s usu

ally

resu

lt fro

m w

inte

rkill

or s

umm

er m

orta

lity.

5 N

umbe

r of y

ears

of d

ata.

Page 14: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

14

Table 10. Summary of Kentucky festulolium yield trials 2001-2015 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).1

Variety Type2 Proprietor

LexingtonMean5

(#trials)20013,4 2005 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

2yr6 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 2yr 2yrAgula MF x IR Allied Seed 94 –Barfest MF x PR Barenbrug USA 105 101 107 114 107(4)Bonus MF x IR Allied Seed 93 46 32 45 54(4)Duo MF x PR Ampac Seed 89 98 99 95 106 103 96 99(7)Felina (TF x IR) x TF DLF International 104 132 118 134 107 119(5)Fojtan (TF x IR) x TF DLF International 112 101 124 91 107(4)Gain MF x IR Allied Seed 103 77 52 91 81(4)Hostyn MF xIR DLF International 107 112 110(2)Hykor (TF x IR) x TF DLF International 133 141 153 125 138(4)Lofa (TF x Int) x Int DLF International 105 107 110 125 112(4)Mahulena (TF x IR) x TF DLF International 131 99 115(2)Meadow Green − Pure Seed 37 44 41(2)Perseus MF x IR DLF International 132 114 126 125 124(4)Perun MF x IR DLF International 127 114 107 124 118(4)Rebab (TFxIR) xTF DLF International 95 −Spring Green MF x PR Turf-Seed 96 111 114 101 113 112 114 108 109(8)Sweet Tart MF x IR ProSeeds Marketing 88 82 63 62 74(4)Vorage − Improved Forages –

1 The festuloliums were in fescue trials from 2001-2005 and in perennial ryegrass trials from 2008-2009.2 MF=meadow fescue, TF=tall fescue, IR=Italian ryegrass, PR=perennial ryegrass, Int=intermediate ryegrass.3 Year trial was established.4 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in forage

yield between varieties. To find actual yields, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 2012 was harvested three years, so the final report would be “2015 Annual and Perennial Ryegrass and Festulolium Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage.

5 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.6 Number of years of data.

Table 11. Summary of Kentucky sudangrass yield trials 2008-2015 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).

VarietyProprietor/KY Distributor

LexingtonMean3

(#trials)20081,2 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

All trials are 1 year yieldsAS9301 BMR4 Alta Seeds/Ramer Seed 118 −Enorma BMR Cal/West Seeds 99 94 92 91 83 91 92(6)FSG 1000 BMR Farm Science Genetics 101 −Hayking BMR Central Farm Supply 111 112 91 97 97 96 92 94 99(8)Monarch V Public 104 96 102 97 93 98 110 99 100(8)Piper Public 90 91 97 94 104 105 89 94 96(8)ProMax BMR Ampac Seed 95 101 110 115 96 103 100 111 104(8)SS130 BMR Cal/West Seeds 101 103 107 106 110 105(5)Trudan Headless Chromatin 118 −

1 Establishment year.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific tables in this report to determine statistical

differences in forage yield between varieties. 3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.4 BMR (Brown Mid-rib) means that a variety has been developed to produce lower amounts of lignin which usually translates into

higher quality.

Page 15: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

15

Table 12. Summary of Kentucky sorghum-sudangrass yield trials 2008-2015 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).

VarietyProprietor/KY Distributor

LexingtonMean3

(#trials)20081,2 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

All trials are 1 year yieldsAS6402 BMR4 Alta Seeds/Ramer Seed 91 −AS6503 BMR6 Alta Seeds/Ramer Seed 96 103 90 96(3)FSG 208 BMR Farm Science Genetics 75 −FSG 214 BMR6 Farm Science Genetics 99 108 112 106(3)FSG 215 BMR6 Farm Science Genetics 112 −Greengrazer V Farm Science Genetics 166 122 107 92 122(4)GW300 BMR Gayland Ward Seed 88 78 88 81 73 82(5)HyGain Turner Seed 104 105 118 109(3)MS 202 BMR Farm Science Genetics 106 −Nutra-King BMR6 Gayland Ward Seed 110 −NutraPlus BMR Cisco 106 97 94 103 106 109 106 96 102(8)Sordan Headless Chromatin 105 −Special Effort Cisco 109 110 93 94 115 120 91 111 105(8)SS211 Southern States 104 93 114 103 118 106(5)SS220 BMR Southern States 107 84 112 101(3)Surpass BMR-6 Turner Seed 81 80 64 75(3)Super Sugar Gayland Ward Seed 102 117 107 125 113(4)Super Sugar (Delayed Maturity) Gayland Ward Seed 101 82 −Super Sugar Sterile Gayland Ward Seed 94 92(2)Sweet-For-Ever Gayland Ward Seed 110 107 81 99(3)Sweet-For-Ever BMR Gayland Ward Seed 78 70 77 75(3)SweetSix BMR Gayland Ward Seed 93 101 97(2)SweetSix BMR (Dry Stalk) Gayland Ward Seed 102 −Vita-Cane Gayland Ward Seed 121 −

1 Establishment year.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific tables in this report to determine statistical differences

in forage yield between varieties.3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.4 BMR (Brown Mid-rib) means that a variety has been developed to produce lower amounts of lignin which usually translates into higher

quality.

Table 13. Summary of Kentucky pearl millet yield trials 2013-2015 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).

VarietyProprietor/KY Distributor 20131,2 2014 2015

Mean3

(#trials)FSG 300 Farm Science Genetics 109 −FSG 315 Dwarf BMR Farm Science Genetics 101 −Pennleaf Hybrid Pennington Seed 93 91 94 93(3)PP102M Hybrid Cisco 93 93 90 92(3)SS501 Southern States 90 99 96 95(3)SS635 Southern States 108 112 101 107(3)Tiffleaf III Hybrid Gayland Ward Seed 116 106 108 110(3)

1 Establishment year.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific

tables in this report to determine statistical differences in forage yield between varieties.

3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.

Page 16: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

16

Table 14. Summary of Kentucky teff yield trials 2008-2015 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).

Variety

Princeton LexingtonMean3

(#trials)20081,2 2009 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

All trials are 1 year yieldsCorvallis 94 112 81 101 91 101 96 100 110 96 98(10)Dessie 102 87 99 92 96 94 95 97 101 104 97(10)Excaliber 109 111 109 104 125 108 106 103 109(8)Highveld 111 115 100 121 106 101 109 103 102 108(9)HorseCandi 91 84 99 105 89 108 94 97 80 104 95(10)Moxie 94 96 105 98(3)Pharaoh 95 101 105 85 106 106 97 101 93 97 99(10)Rooiberg 102 107 112 109 113 108 115 102 88 106(9)Summer Delight 90 91 96 88 93 100 119 101 97(8)Tiffany 102 106 102 93 82 93 102 98 104 97 98(10)VA T1 Brown 89 99 87 91 94 98 104 97 95(8)Velvet 94 100 97 98 95 103 95 99 98(8)Witkope 94 100 93 101 115 103 101 104 107 102(9)

1 Establishment year.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific tables in this report to determine

statistical differences in forage yield between varieties. 3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.

Table 15. Summary of 2002-2015 Kentucky white clover grazing tolerance trials in Lexington (stand persistence shown as a percent of the mean of the commercial varieties in the test).

Variety Type Proprietor20021,2 2004 20063 2006 20084 2008 2009 2010 2011 2013 Mean5

(#trials)2yr6 4yr 2yr 2yr 3yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 2yrAlice Intermediate Barenbrug USA 59 98 79(2)Barblanca Intermediate Barenbrug USA 118 91 151 120(3)Canterbury Dutch Allied Seed 84 –Colt Intermediate Seed Research of OR 114 134 122 123(3)Crescendo Ladino Cal/West 84 72 78(2)Durana Intermediate Pennington 83 105 103 115 102 107 126 91 104(8)GWC-AS10 − Ampac Seed 77 –Insight Ladino Allied Seed 77 –Ivory Intermediate DLF International 132 142 137(2)Ivory II Intermediate DLF International 102 –Kopu II Intermediate Ampac Seed 77 122 96 93 113 112 97 101(7)KY Select Intermediate KY Agr Ex. Sta./Saddle Butte 105 83 94(2)Patriot Intermediate Pennington 110 137 122 100 111 110 123 84 112(8)Pinnacle Ladino Allied Seed 87 –Rampart − Oregro Seeds 90 –Regal Ladino Public 92 57 54 93 103 80(5)Regal Graze Ladino Cal/West 84 87 105 90 87 93 72 118 92(8)Resolute Intermediate FFR/Southern States 101 106 65 91(3)Seminole Ladino Saddle Butte Ag. Inc. 75 97 91 93 89(4)Tillman II Ladino Caudill Seed 92 –WBDX Dutch Saddle Butte Ag. Inc. 70 –Will Ladino Allied Seed 117 87 107 105 108 143 115 133 114(8)

1 Year trial was established.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in stand persistence between

varieties. To find actual persistence ratings, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific test. For example, the trial planted in 2010 was grazed for four years so the final persistence report would be “2014 Red and White Clover Grazing Tolerance Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage.

3 This trial was replanted in the spring of 2006 due to poor establishment in the fall of 2005.4 This trial was replanted in the spring of 2008 due to poor establishment in the fall of 2007.5 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.6 Number of years of data.

Page 17: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

17

Table 16. Summary of 2000-2015 Kentucky perennial ryegrass and festulolium (FL) grazing tolerance trials in Lexington (stand persistence shown as a percent of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).

Variety Type Proprietor20001,2 2001 2003 2005 2007 2008 2010 2011 2012 Mean3

(#trials)4yr4 3yr 4yr 3-yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 3yrAGRLP103 − AgResearch USA 128 86 107(2)Aries diploid Ampac Seed 139 –Barfest (FL) MF x PR6 Barenbrug USA 111 104 108(2)BG 34 diploid Barenbrug USA 1765 1455 129 147 116 142(5)Boost tetraploid Allied Seed 101 79 89 108 94(4)Calibra tetraploid DLF International 114 –Citadel tetraploid Donley Seed 107 –Duo (FL) MF x PR6 Ampac Seed 116 95 68 84 111 95(5)Grand Daddy tetraploid Smith Seed Services 121 70 95 76 105 93(5)Lasso diploid DLF-Jenks 130 –Linn (certified) diploid Public 112 129 63 95 103 89 105 99(7)Maverick tetraploid Ampac Seed 36 –Meadow Green (FL) − Pure Seed 10 –Polly II tetraploid FFR/Southern States 36 68 52(2)Power tetraploid Ampac Seed 134 102 104 110 113(4)Quartet tetraploid Ampac Seed 77 63 50 60(3)Remington tetraploid Barenbrug USA 1515 –Spring Green (FL) MF x PR6 Rose Agri-Seed 101 109 109 108 113 108(5)TetraGain tetraploid Pure Seed 110 –Tonga tetraploid Ampac Seed 61 –

1 Year trial was established.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in stand persistence between

varieties. To find actual persistence ratings, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 2010 was grazed four years so the final report would be “2014 Cool-Season Grass Grazing Tolerance Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage.

3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.4 Number of years of data.5 Grazing tolerance values for these entries may have been elevated due to the low survival of the other commercial varieties in the trials for these years.6 MF=meadow fescue, PR=perennial ryegrass.

Table 17. Summary of 1999-2015 Kentucky orchardgrass horse grazing tolerance trials in Lexington (stand persistence shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).

VarietyProprietor/KY Distributor

19991,2 2000 2001 2002 20053 2006 2009 2010 2011 2012 Mean4

(#trials)3-yr5 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 3-yrAlbert Univ. of Wisconsin 95 −Ambrosia Amer.Grass Seed Prod. 61 −Benchmark FFR/Southern States 104 85 95(2)Benchmark Plus FFR/Southern States 111 157 139 111 114 121 130 121(6)Crown Royale Grassland Oregon 95 −Crown Royale Plus Grassland Oregon 97 −Elise Pure Seed 86Haymate FFR/Southern States 96 85 97 93(3)Persist Smith Seed 114 103 101 92 115 103(4)Potomac Public 117 −Prairie Turner Seed 100 −Profit Ampac Seed 93 86 73 84(3)SS-0708OGDT FFR/Southern States 104 −Tekapo Ampac Seed 101 115 93 30 92 100 83 95 98(7)

1 Year trial was established.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in stand

persistence between varieties. To find actual persistence ratings, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 2010 was grazed four years so the final report would be “2014 Cool-Season Grass Horse Grazing Tolerance Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage.

3 Due to high variation during 2005 these values are not included in the overall mean.4 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.5 Number of years of data.

Page 18: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

18

Tabl

e 18

. Sum

mar

y of

Ken

tuck

y al

falfa

gra

zing

tria

ls 1

998-

2015

(sta

nd p

ersi

sten

ce sh

own

as a

per

cent

of t

he g

razi

ng to

lera

nt A

lfagr

aze)

.

Varie

tyPr

oprie

tor

Varie

ty C

hara

cter

istic

s1Le

xing

ton

Mea

n5

(#tr

ials

)FD

Dis

ease

Res

ista

nce2

1998

3,4

2000

2000

2001

2004

2005

2006

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

BwFw

AnPR

RAP

H3y

r62y

r3y

r3y

r4y

r4y

r3y

r4y

r4y

r4y

r4y

r3y

rAB

T 35

0W

-L R

esea

rch

3HR

HRHR

HRHR

46–

ABT

405

W-L

Res

earc

h4

HRHR

HRHR

R46

100

73(2

)Al

fagr

aze

Amer

icas

Alfa

lfa2

MR

RM

RR

–10

010

010

010

010

010

010

010

010

010

010

010

010

0(12

)Al

fagr

aze3

00 R

RAm

eric

as A

lfalfa

3HR

RHR

HRHR

110

–Am

erig

raze

401

+ZAm

eric

as A

lfalfa

4HR

HRHR

HRR

5626

8512

573

(4)

Amer

istan

d 40

3TAm

eric

as A

lfalfa

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

141

144

5091

115

108(

5)Am

erist

and

403T

Plus

Amer

icas

Alfa

lfa4

HRHR

HRHR

HR13

390

112(

2)

Amer

istan

d 40

7TQ

Amer

icas

Alfa

lfa4

HRHR

HRHR

HR13

650

8089

(3)

Apol

loAm

eric

as A

lfalfa

4R

RR

R–

4717

3125

3627

2517

2770

6936

(11)

Arch

er II

IAm

eric

as A

lfalfa

5HR

HRHR

HRHR

3383

58(2

)Ba

ralfa

54

Bare

nbru

g US

A–

RHR

HRHR

HR78

–Bu

lldog

-505

Univ

. of G

A5

–HR

–R

–13

8–

FK 4

21D

onle

y Se

ed C

o.4

HRH

H H

H 10

0–

Feas

tGa

rst S

eeds

3HR

HRHR

HRR

8792

90(2

)Go

ld P

lus

PGI A

lfalfa

4HR

HRHR

HRR

81–

Graz

ekin

gFF

R/So

uthe

rn

Stat

es5

MR

HRHR

RS

50–

Hayg

raze

rGr

eat P

lain

s Re

sear

ch4

HRHR

RR

MR

38–

Inte

grity

PGI A

lfalfa

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

172

–Le

genD

airy

5.0

Crop

lan

Gene

tics

3HR

HRHR

HRHR

087

44(2

)PG

I 424

Prod

ucer

s Cho

ice

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

45–

PGI 4

59Pr

oduc

ers C

hoic

e4

HRHR

HRHR

HR17

9355

(2)

Pion

eer 9

8Pi

onee

r3

HRR

HRR

–56

–Pr

oGro

MBS

Inc.

4HR

HRR

HRM

R81

–Re

bel

Targ

et S

eed

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

79–

Rugg

edTa

rget

See

d3

HRHR

HRHR

HR14

6–

Sara

nac

AR (c

ert.)

Publ

ic4

MR

RHR

LR–

100

–Sp

redo

r 3Sy

ngen

ta1

HRHR

RM

RS

7568

72(2

)Sp

redo

r 4Sy

ngen

ta2

HRHR

HRHR

R25

–TS

400

7Pr

oduc

ers C

hoic

e4

HRR

HRHR

HR82

–TS

401

0/A4

535

Prod

ucer

s Cho

ice

4HR

RHR

HRHR

8314

512

011

6(3)

Trip

le Tr

ust 4

50AB

I/Am

eric

a’s

Alfa

lfa5

HRHR

HRHR

HR14

5–

Win

terg

reen

ABI A

lfalfa

3HR

HRHR

HRR

72–

WL

326G

ZW

-L R

esea

rch

4HR

HRHR

HRHR

88–

115

Bran

dM

onsa

nto

3HR

HRR

HRR

5685

71(2

)54

32Pi

onee

r4

HRHR

–M

R–

51–

1 Va

riety

cha

ract

erist

ics:

FD=f

all d

orm

ancy

, Bw

=bac

teria

l wilt

, Fw

=fus

ariu

m w

ilt, A

n=an

thra

cnos

e, P

RR=p

hyto

phth

era

root

rot,

APH-

apha

nom

yces

root

rot.

Info

rmat

ion

prov

ided

by

seed

co

mpa

nies

.2

Dise

ase

resis

tanc

e: S

=sus

cept

ible

, LR=

low

resis

tanc

e, M

R=m

oder

ate

resis

tanc

e, R

=res

istan

ce, H

R=hi

gh re

sista

nce.

3 Ye

ar tr

ial w

as e

stab

lishe

d.4

Use

this

sum

mar

y ta

ble

as a

gui

de in

mak

ing

varie

ty d

ecisi

ons,

but r

efer

to sp

ecifi

c ye

arly

repo

rts t

o de

term

ine

stat

istic

al d

iffer

ence

s in

stan

d pe

rsist

ence

bet

wee

n va

rietie

s. To

find

act

ual

pers

isten

ce ra

tings

, loo

k in

the

year

ly re

port

for t

he fi

nal y

ear o

f eac

h sp

ecifi

c te

st. F

or e

xam

ple,

the

Lexi

ngto

n tr

ial p

lant

ed in

201

1 w

as g

raze

d fo

r fou

r yea

rs so

fina

l per

siste

nce

repo

rt w

ould

be

“201

5 Al

falfa

Gra

zing

Tole

ranc

e Re

port

” arc

hive

d in

the

KY F

orag

e w

ebsit

e at

ww

w.u

ky.e

du/A

g/Fo

rage

.5

Mea

n on

ly p

rese

nted

whe

n re

spec

tive

varie

ty w

as in

clud

ed in

two

or m

ore

tria

ls.6

Num

ber o

f yea

rs o

f dat

a.

Page 19: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

19

Table 19. Summary of 2000-2015 Kentucky tall fescue grazing tolerance trials (stand persistence shown as a percent of the stand rating of KY 31+).

Variety Proprietor

Lexington PrincetonMean3

(#trials)20001,2 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2002

4yr4 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 3yr 4yrAdvance MaxQ5 Pennington Seed 94 –Bariane Barenbrug USA 89 75 47 29 60(4)BarElite Barenbrug USA 96 –Barolex Barenbrug USA 78 101 86 88(3)BarOptima PLUS E345 Barenbrug USA 100 97 98 100 99 99(5)Bronson Ampac Seed 98 98 98(2)Cajun II Smith Seed Services 98 –Cattle Club Green Seed 93 91 92(2)Carmine DLF-Jenks 90 –Cowgirl Rose Agri-Seed 99 100 100(2)Festival Pickseed West 100 101 89 97(3)Festorina Advanta Seeds 80(3)Flourish Allied Seed 98 –Goliath Ampac Seed 98 –Hoedown DLF-Jenks 88 –HyMark Fraser Seeds 95 100 98(2)Jesup EF Pennington Seed 99 99 100 99 99(4)Jesup MaxQ5 Pennington Seed 103 97 68 102 97 97 99 98 100 99 105 97(11)Johnstone Proseeds 92 –KY31+5 KY Agri. Exp Sta. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100(14)KY31-5 KY Agri. Exp Sta. 98 103 98 100 82 100 100 98 99 99 100 99 105 99(13)Kokanee Ampac Seed 43 –Maximize Rose Agri-Seed 99 –Nanryo Japanese Grassland

For. Seed100 –

Orygun – 99 –Resolute Ampac Seed 23 –Select FFR/Sou. St. 107 101 100 100 67 100 93 95 97 99 100 99 98 97(13)Stargrazer FFR/Sou. St. 86 89 79(4)Stockman Seed Res. of OR 102 –Texoma MaxQ5 Pennington Seed 88 100 98 95(3)Tuscany II Seed Res. of OR 100 –Verdant Am.Grass Seed 97 –

1 Year trial was established.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in stand persistence between

varieties. To find actual persistence ratings, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 2010 was grazed four years so the final report would be “2014 Cool-Season Grass Grazing Tolerance Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage.

3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.4 Number of years of data.5 KY 31- is the variety KY31 from which the toxic endophyte has been removed. KY31+ contains the toxic endophyte. Jesup MaxQ, Texoma MaxQ and Advance MaxQ

contain a non-toxic endophyte. BarOptima PLUS E34 contains a beneficial endophyte. The other fescue varieties in this table do not contain an endophyte.

Table 20. Summary of 1999-2015 Kentucky tall fescue horse grazing tolerance trials in Lexington (stand persistence shown as a percent of the stand rating of KY 31-).

Variety Proprietor/KY Distributor19991,2 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Mean3

(#trials)3-yr4 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 3-yrBarOptima PLUS E345 Barenbrug 107 101 101 95 101(4)Bronson Ampac Seed 80 −Cattle Club Green Seed 95 −Cowgirl Rose Agri-Seed 105 99 102(2)Festorina Advanta Seed 102 −Jesup MaxQ5 Pennington Seed 98 78 104 97 100 101 98 97(7)Johnstone ProSeeds 88 −KY31+5 KY Agri. Exp.Sta. 105 102 109 120 107 101 101 101 99 105(9)KY31-5 KY Agri. Exp.Sta. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100(13)Nanryo Japanese Grassland For. Seed 72 −Seine Seed Research of OR 135 −Select FFR/Southern States 82 109 94 99 73 104 76 108 98 100 101 99 95(12)Stargrazer FFR/Southern States 70 −Stockman Seed Research of OR 125 −

1 Year trial was established.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in stand persistence between

varieties. To find actual persistence ratings, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 2010 was grazed four years so the final report would be “2014 Cool-Season Grass Horse Grazing Tolerance Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage.

3 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.4 Number of years of data.5 KY 31- is the variety KY31 from which the toxic endophyte has been removed. KY31+ contains the toxic endophyte. Jesup MaxQ contains a non-toxic endophyte.

BarOptima PLUS E34 contains a beneficial endophyte. The other fescue varieties in this table do not contain an endophyte.

Page 20: PR-705: 2015 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety

Table 21. Summary of 2000-2015 Kentucky orchardgrass grazing tolerance trials (stand persistence shown as a percent of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).

Variety Proprietor

Lexington PrincetonMean4

(#trials)20001,2 2001 2002 2003 2004 20053 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 2002

4yr5 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 3yr 4yrAbertop Pennington Seed 38 –Albert Univ. of Wisconsin 115 –Amba DLF-Jenks 71 –Ambrosia Pennington Seed 94 –Athos DLF-Jenks 93 60 –Benchmark FFR/Sou. States 118 123 114 133 122(4)Benchmark Plus FFR/Sou. States 120 152 135 106 106 108 113 133 117(7)Boone Public 102 –Command Seed Research of OR 81 –Crown Royale Donley Seed 100 –Crown Royale Plus Donley Seed 124 83 104(2)Elise Pure Seed 102 –Hallmark James VanLeeuwen 115 113 83 104(3)Harvestar Columbia Seeds 75 89 94 86(3)Haymate FFR/Sou. States 53 115 100 118 83 94(5)Intensiv Barenbrug USA 51 –Mammoth DLF-Jenks 115 –Megabite Turf Seed 77 –Niva DLF-Jenks 76 83 80(2)Persist Smith Seed 138 107 103 100 96 93 106(6)Potomac Public 116 119 117 117(3)Prairie Turner Seed 127 121 94 83 106(4)Profile Scott Seed 116 –Profit Ampac Seed 95 99 102 99 99(4)Tekapo Ampac Seed 55 74 118 50 103 95 105 106 93 100 94(9)Takena Smith Seed 99 –Seco FFR/Sou. States 85 –

1 Year trial was established.2 Use this summary table as a guide in making variety decisions, but refer to specific yearly reports to determine statistical differences in stand persistence between

varieties. To find actual persistence ratings, look in the yearly report for the final year of each specific trial. For example, the Lexington trial planted in 2010 was grazed four years so the final report would be “2014 Cool-Season Grass Grazing Tolerance Report” archived in the KY Forage website at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage.

3 Due to high variation during 2005 these values are not included in the overall mean.4 Mean only presented when respective variety was included in two or more trials.5 Number of years of data.Stand thinning may have been greater for preferred varieties due to closer grazing. See individual trial tables for preference ratings.

The College of Agriculture, Food and Environment is an Equal Opportunity Organization.12-2015

Mention or display of a trademark, proprietary product, or firm in text or fig-ures does not constitute an endorsement and does not imply approval to the

exclusion of other suitable products or firms.