Agronomy Journal
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (12)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Burner, D. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Burner, D. M.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Burner, D. M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Agroclimatology
Right arrow Forage Management
Right arrow Sustainable Agriculture
Right arrow Crop Growth and Development
Right arrow Intercropping Systems
Right arrow Crop Systems
Right arrow Production Agriculture

Influence of Alley Crop Environment on Orchardgrass and Tall Fescue Herbage

David M. Burner*

USDA-ARS, Dale Bumpers Small Farms Res. Cent., 6883 S. State Hwy. 23, Booneville, AR 72927



View larger version (21K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Diagram of one replicate in the experiment showing alley treatments (main plots) and herbage treatments (split plots). Alley treatments were randomized among replicates, and herbage treatments were randomized within alley treatments.

 



View larger version (36K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Mean monthly temperatures for the study period. (A) Air temperatures for March–October growth interval in 2000–2001, March–April 2002, and long-term mean (1957–2000). (B) Soil temperature for the March–October growth interval in 2000–2001 and for March–April 2002. Error bars indicate ± standard error of the mean.

 


View larger version (48K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. Monthly rainfall totals for the March–October growth interval in 2000–2001, March–April 2002, and long-term mean (1957–2000).

 


View larger version (53K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. Mean height and diameter breast height (DBH) of loblolly and shortleaf pine. For each variable, letters indicate that species differed by F test (P < 0.001).

 


View larger version (44K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5. Mean canopy cover of loblolly and shortleaf pine measured annually at the center of alley between rows in 2001 and 2002. Letters indicate that species differed by F test (P < 0.001).

 



View larger version (39K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6. Effect of harvest x herbage interactions on botanical composition measured six times in 2000–2002. Percentage of (A) orchardgrass and (B) tall fescue. Vertical bar indicates LSD (P <= 0.05).

 



View larger version (40K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 7. Effect of harvest x alley interactions on botanical composition measured six times in 2000–2002. Percentage of (A) orchardgrass and (B) tall fescue. Vertical bar indicates LSD (P <= 0.05).

 



View larger version (46K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 8. Effect of harvest x herbage interactions on dry matter yield measured six times in 2000–2002. Yield of (A) all botanical components and (B) seeded species. Vertical bar indicates LSD (P <= 0.05).

 



View larger version (45K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 9. Effect of harvest x alley interactions on dry matter yield measured six times in 2000–2002. Yield of (A) all botanical components and (B) seeded species. Vertical bar indicates LSD (P <= 0.05).

 


View larger version (36K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 10. Effect of herbage x alley interactions on dry matter yield of seeded species. Letters indicate treatments differed by LSD (0.05) of 433 kg ha-1.

 



View larger version (41K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 11. Mean herbage crude protein concentration harvested six times during 2000–2002. (A) Harvest x herbage and (B) harvest x alley interactions. Vertical bar indicates LSD (P <= 0.05).

 


View larger version (30K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 12. Effect of harvest x alley interactions on herbage NO3–N measured twice in 2001. Letters indicate treatments differed by LSD (0.05) of 289 µg g-1.

 


View larger version (19K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 13. Effect of harvest x herbage interactions on herbage in vitro dry matter digestibility (IVDMD) measured five times in 2000–2002. Vertical bar indicates LSD (P <= 0.05).

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Crop Science Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2003 by the American Society of Agronomy.