Bridging the Fall Forage Gap with Stockpiled Limpograss Along the Southern Gulf Coast

Project Overview

OS21-142
Project Type: On-Farm Research
Funds awarded in 2021: $19,981.00
Projected End Date: 03/31/2023
Grant Recipient: University of Florida - NFREC
Region: Southern
State: Florida
Principal Investigator:
Dr. Jose Dubeux, Jr.
University of Florida - NFREC

Information Products

Commodities

  • Agronomic: grass (misc. perennial)
  • Animals: bovine

Practices

  • Animal Production: feed/forage, grazing management

    Abstract:

    Stockpiling limpograss is the proposed solution to reduce the forage shortage in the Fall. Grazing stockpiled limpograss is also more sustainable than conserved forages such as hay or baleage. These conserved feedstuffs require greater use of inputs, including machinery, fossil fuel, and fertilizers. Limpograss has unique characteristics including a slow decrease on its digestibility compared with other warm-season perennial grass, being a perfect candidate for stockpiling. Limpograss is less light sensitive compared with other warm-season perennial grasses such as bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum Flügge) or bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.]. As a result, if there are warmer periods within the cool season, limpograss starts greening up, enhancing forage nutritive value. Limpograss can also help to bridge the Spring gap, when bahiagrass and bermudagrass are still dormant. Limpograss is one of the warm-season perennial grasses that have the earliest growth in the Spring. Therefore, establishing limpograss along the Gulf Coast can extend the grazing season and reduce off-farm inputs, increasing sustainability of beef farm operations.

    Because lack of planting material and lack of knowledge on how to manage limpograss along FL Panhandle is one important ‘bottleneck’ for adoption, we established Gibtuck limpograss on producer’s sites along the FL Panhandle and performed management trials at each location. These producers can also be a source of planting material in the future, disseminate planting material across different locations along the region and increase adoption. We performed on-farm small plot trials assessing limpograss growth and nutritive value using different stockpiling periods. Results indicated greater biomass accumulation in Year 2, likely because of the establishment in year 1. Crude protein was also better in year 2, with average of 7.25% across stockpiling periods. Forage IVDOM declined with the increase in stockpiling period, but 60 days of stockpiling would provide satisfactory nutritive value. Livestock would need protein supplementation, but the stockpiled grass would provide the bulk of the diet a=in a more sustainable way than using hay. We had a field day to distribute planting material and disseminate educational information about limpograss, and another field day is scheduled for 27 June 2023.  One large farm (Deseret Cattle & Timber) located in North FL is planting extensive areas of limpograss, which can help changing the perception and increasing adoption of limpograss in the region. We generated videos and articles with information on how to successfully establish limpograss. The information generated in this project will help to educate farmers to manage limpograss along FL Panhandle as well as produce planting material for further multiplication.

    Project objectives:

    Four producers strategically located along the FL Panhandle participated in this project. Planting material of Gibtuck limpograss is available at UF IFAS NFREC in Marianna and was used to establish producer’s field in this project. Each producer provided 1-acre field to establish the limpograss. Prior to planting, we collected soil samples from 0-16”and analyzed for soil fertility and soil physics. Producers prepared the soil prior to planting. Limpograss stolons were harvested and planted in the same day, at a rate of 1,500 lb/acre. The planting material (stolons) was spread along the prepared land, disked in, and rolled/cultipacked. Fertilizer was applied following IFAS recommendation.

    After limpograss establishment, plots were staged by late August to early September to start stockpiling periods. On the planted area, we installed a small-plot trial with different stockpiling periods (treatments): 30, 60, 90, 120 days. Each plot measured 6 x 15 ft and were replicated four times. Treatments were allocated in a randomized complete block design. These on-farm trials generated information on herbage accumulation and nutritive value of stockpiled limpograss along these different deferment periods. The trials were repeated in 2022.

     

    The central portion of the plot was harvested using a quadrats. All forage in the harvested area was weighed (fresh weight) and recorded. Subsamples were collected for DM determination and for nutritive value. Subsamples were weighed before and after drying at 131˚F for 48 h in an air-circulating dryer for DM (131˚F) determination. Samples were milled to pass through a 2-mm mesh using a Wiley Mill (Model 4, Thomas-Wiley Laboratory Mill, Thomas Scientific). Samples were analyzed for in vitro digestible organic matter (IVDOM) and crude protein (CP). The IVDOM was determined using the protocol described by Moore and Mott (1974). Nitrogen concentration was analyzed using the Dumas dry combustion method. Prior to analysis, samples were ball milled in a Mixer Mill (MM 400, Retsch, Haan, Germany) at 25 Hz for 9 min. Ball-milled samples were used to determine total N concentrations by dry combustion using an elemental analyzer (Vario Micro cube, Elementar, Germany). Total N concentration was multiplied by 6.25 to calculate crude protein.

     

    Data were analyzed using the SAS statistical package and the proc mixed procedure. Stockpiling period and year were considered fixed effect. Farm and replication within each farm were considered random effects. Least square means were separated using the PDIFF procedure from SAS and significance declared at P < 0.05.

     

    The outreach plan is described in the specific section later in the document.

    Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture or SARE.