Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-77ffc5d9c7-q8dck Total loading time: 0.482 Render date: 2021-04-23T04:34:40.048Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Harvest date does not influence variety ranking in Belgian forage maize variety trials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2015

J. SWANCKAERT
Affiliation:
Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Burg. Van Gansberghelaan 109, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium Department of Plant Production, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Proefhoevestraat 22, 9090 Melle, Belgium
J. PANNECOUCQUE
Affiliation:
Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Burg. Van Gansberghelaan 109, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
J. VAN WAES
Affiliation:
Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Burg. Van Gansberghelaan 109, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
B. DE CAUWER
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Production, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Proefhoevestraat 22, 9090 Melle, Belgium
J. LATRE
Affiliation:
Department of Bio- and Food Science, Faculty of Science and Technology, University College Ghent, Valentin Vaerwyckweg 1, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
G. HAESAERT
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Biosciences, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Valentin Vaerwyckweg 1, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
D. REHEUL
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Production, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Proefhoevestraat 22, 9090 Melle, Belgium
Corresponding

Summary

Silage maize variety testing systems usually evaluate new varieties within properly defined maturity groups; within a maturity group, all varieties are harvested on a single harvest date. In a small country like Belgium where growing conditions are similar across the maize growing areas, all tested silage maize varieties, comprising different maturity groups, are harvested on a single date. Under this testing system, only few varieties are harvested at the physiological stage where they theoretically show their optimal performance. In the current research, eight silage maize varieties were monitored from 25 to 40% whole-crop dry matter (DM) content at three locations in Belgium during the period 2007–2009. The optimal harvest date was calculated as the date where whole-crop DM yield, ear DM yield and organic matter digestibility were maximal. The variety rank at the optimal harvest date was compared with the variety rank at any studied single harvest date. Harvest dates where the variety rank was not statistically different to the rank at the optimal harvest date were pooled in a ‘harvest window’. Based on the current data, the harvest window comprised a flexible harvest period of about 14 days. It was therefore concluded that applying a single harvest date is scientifically justified for the ranking of silage maize varieties in Belgium, when the whole-crop DM content is between 28·1 and 40·6% with a maximum difference of 7·2% between all compared varieties.

Type
Crops and Soils Research Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Argillier, O., Barriere, Y., Dardenne, P., Emile, J. C. & Hebert, Y. (1998). Genotypic variation for in vitro criteria and relationships with in vivo digestibility in forage maize hybrids. Plant Breeding 117, 437441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arriola, K. G., Kim, S. C., Huisden, C. M. & Adesogan, A. T. (2012). Stay-green ranking and maturity of corn hybrids: 1. Effects on dry matter yield, nutritional value, fermentation characteristics, and aerobic stability of silage hybrids in Florida. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 964974.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bal, M. A., Coors, J. G. & Shaver, R. D. (1997). Impact of the maturity of corn for use as silage in the diets of dairy cows on intake, digestion, and milk production. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 24972503.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barriere, Y., Argillier, O., Michalet-Doreau, B., Hebert, Y., Guingo, E., Giauffret, C. & Emile, J. C. (1997). Relevant traits, genetic variation and breeding strategies in early silage maize. Agronomie 17, 395411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boon, E. J. M. C., Struik, P. C., Engels, F. M. & Cone, J. W. (2012). Stem characteristics of two forage maize (Zea mays L.) cultivars varying in whole plant digestibility. IV. Changes during the growing season in anatomy and chemical composition in relation to fermentation characteristics of a lower internode. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 59, 1323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cone, J. W., Van Gelder, A. H., Van Schooten, H. A. & Groten, J. A. M. (2008). Effects of forage maize type and maturity stage on in vitro rumen fermentation characteristics. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 55, 139154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darby, H. M. & Lauer, J. G. (2002). Harvest date and hybrid influence on corn forage yield, quality, and preservation. Agronomy Journal 94, 559566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Boever, J. L., Cottyn, B. G., De Brabander, D. L., Vanacker, J. M. & Boucque, C. V. (1997). Prediction of the feeding value of maize silages by chemical parameters, in vitro digestibility and NIRS. Animal Feed Science and Technology 66, 211222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Boever, J. L., Vanacker, J. M. & De Brabander, D. L. (2002). Rumen degradation characteristics of nutrients in maize silages and evaluation of laboratory measurements and NIRS as predictors. Animal Feed Science and Technology 101, 7386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ettle, T. & Schwarz, F. J. (2003). Effect of maize variety harvested at different maturity stages on feeding value and performance of dairy cows. Animal Research 52, 337349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goering, H. K. & van Soest, P. J. (1970). Forage Fiber Analysis (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures, and Some Applications). Handbook No. 379. Washington, DC: USDA Agricultural Research Service.Google Scholar
Hetta, M., Mussadiq, Z., Gustavsson, A. M. & Swensson, C. (2012). Effects of hybrid and maturity on performance and nutritive characteristics of forage maize at high latitudes, estimated using the gas production technique. Animal Feed Science and Technology 171, 2030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, C., Weisbjerg, M. R., Norgaard, P. & Hvelplund, T. (2005). Effect of maize silage maturity on site of starch and NDF digestion in lactating dairy cows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 118, 279294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, L., Harrison, J. H., Hunt, C., Shinners, K., Doggett, C. G. & Sapienza, D. (1999). Nutritive value of corn silage as affected by maturity and mechanical processing: a contemporary review. Journal of Dairy Science 82, 28132825.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phipps, R. H., Sutton, J. D., Beever, D. E. & Jones, A. K. (2000). The effect of crop maturity on the nutritional value of maize silage for lactating dairy cows 3. Food intake and milk production. Animal Science 71, 401409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, S. W., Hanway, J. J. & Benson, G. O. (1997). How a Corn Plant Develops. Special Report No. 48. Ames, Iowa, USA: Iowa State University Cooperative Extension Service.Google Scholar
Schwab, E. C., Shaver, R. D., Lauer, J. G. & Coors, J. G. (2003). Estimating silage energy value and milk yield to rank corn hybrids. Animal Feed Science and Technology 109, 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Waes, J. (2009). Maize variety testing for registration on a national catalogue and the impact of new technologies. Maydica 54, 139153.Google Scholar
Wiersma, D. W., Carter, P. R., Albrecht, K. A. & Coors, J. G. (1993). Kernel milkline stage and corn forage yield, quality, and dry-matter content. Journal of Production Agriculture 6, 9499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, J. M. & Hill, J. (2003). Effect on yield and dry-matter distribution of the stay-green characteristic in cultivars of forage maize grown in England. Grass Forage Science 58, 258264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zscheischler, J., Estler, M. C., Staudacher, W., Gross, F., Burgstaller, G., Streyl, H. & Rechmann, T. (1990). Maize Handbook: Environmentally Friendly Cultivation, Cost-effective Utilization. Frankfurt Main, Germany: DLG-Verlag.Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 9
Total number of PDF views: 54 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Harvest date does not influence variety ranking in Belgian forage maize variety trials
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Harvest date does not influence variety ranking in Belgian forage maize variety trials
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Harvest date does not influence variety ranking in Belgian forage maize variety trials
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *