pr-687: 2014 long-term summary of kentucky forage variety
TRANSCRIPT
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-687
2014 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky Forage Variety TrialsS.R. Smith, G.L. Olson, and G. D. Lacefield, Plant and Soil Sciences
List of Tables pageTable 1. White Clover Yield ..........................................1Table 2. Red Clover Yield ..............................................2 Table 3 Alfalfa Yield ......................................................4Table 4. Tall Fescue Yield ..............................................6 Table 5. Orchardgrass Yield .........................................8Table 6. Annual Ryegrass Yield .................................10Table 7. Timothy Yield.................................................12Table 8. Kentucky Bluegrass Yield............................12Table 9 Perennial Ryegrass Yield .............................13Table 10. Festulolium Yield ..........................................14Table 11. Sudangrass Yield ..........................................14Table 12. Sorghum-Sudangrass Yield .......................15Table 13. Teff Yield .........................................................15Table 14. White Clover Grazing ...................................16Table 15. Perennial Ryegrass Grazing .......................16Table 16. Alfalfa Grazing ...............................................17Table 17. Tall Fescue Grazing.......................................18Table 18 Orchardgrass Grazing ..................................19Table 19. Tall Fescue Horse Grazing ...........................20Table 20. Orchardgrass Horse Grazing ......................20
Table 1. Summary of Kentucky white clover yield trials 2002-2014 (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 03 05 98 03 033yr4 3yr 3-yr 2-yr 2-yr 3yr 2yr 3yr 3yr 2yr 3yr 3-yr 3yr 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 100 124 103 100 98 105(5)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 65(3)Excel Ladino Allied Seed, L.L.C. 100 –Durana Intermediate Pennington 94 94 88 82 85 97 93 84 87 83 101 95 90(12)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 Saddle Butte Ag. Inc 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 99 104 100 98 99 103(12)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 92 125 100 116 118 129 147 107 100 100 104 118(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. 107 162 150 132 107 119 137 130 136 131(9)
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 2002 was harvested 3 years, so the final report would be “2004 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
2
Tabl
e 2.
Sum
mar
y of
Ken
tuck
y re
d cl
over
yie
ld tr
ials
200
0-20
14 (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
1200
0305
0809
1113
0103
0508
1000
0308
103y
r43y
r3y
r3y
r3y
r3y
r2y
r3y
r2y
r3y
r3y
r2y
r3y
r3y
r2y
r3y
r2y
r2y
r2y
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
112
102
102
100
9810
310
812
410
812
210
9(17
)Co
mm
on O
Publ
ic96
9763
7872
7781
(6)
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
511
013
610
711
695
107
111
103
119
106
115
102
102
100
140
109(
28)
Free
dom
!MR
Bare
nbru
g US
A11
811
510
211
411
411
210
610
110
894
111
128
118
125
112(
14)
FSG
402
Allie
d Se
ed10
7–
FSG
9601
Allie
d Se
ed89
–Ga
llant
Turn
er S
eed
108
–Im
pact
Spec
ialty
See
ds10
697
9810
0(3)
Julie
tCa
udill
See
d84
9390
8459
82(5
)Ke
nlan
d (c
ert.)
KY A
g.Ex
p St
a.11
011
112
713
911
811
711
799
111
9911
611
410
410
292
113
106
106
111
111
8810
510
412
310
498
110
138
110(
28)
Kenl
and
(unc
ert)
Publ
ic82
7483
6766
9277
(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
8596
(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)continuedsummary of forage yield and grazing toler-
ance trials conducted in Kentucky over the past 10 to 12 years. Detailed variety reports and forage management publications are available from your local 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 improved varieties are generally productive for two to three years, with the highest yields occurring in the year following establishment. Red clover is used primarily as a renovation legume for grass pastures. It is a dominant for-age 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 historically been the highest yielding, highest quality for-age legume grown in Kentucky. 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. Choosing a good alfalfa variety is a key step in establish-ing a stand of alfalfa. The choice of variety can impact yield, stand persistence, 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 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-
3
Tabl
e 2.
(con
tinue
d)
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
1200
0305
0809
1113
0103
0508
1000
0308
103y
r43y
r3y
r3y
r3y
r3y
r2y
r3y
r2y
r3y
r3y
r2y
r3y
r3y
r2y
r3y
r2y
r2y
r2y
r2y
r2y
r3y
r3y
r3y
r3y
r2y
r3y
r3y
rPr
ima
Publ
ic92
7483
(2)
Qui
nequ
eli
Caud
ill S
eed
9280
5776
(3)
Red
Gold
Pr
osee
ds M
arke
ting
8189
102
91(3
)Re
d Go
ld P
lus
Turn
er S
eed
9797
9595
9898
97(6
)Re
dlan
Graz
eAB
I Alfa
lfa95
–Re
dlan
Graz
e II
Amer
icas
Alfa
lfa91
104
9396
(3)
Redl
and
Max
ABI A
lfalfa
95–
Reds
tart
Syng
enta
102
7890
(2)
Robu
stSc
ott S
eed
92–
Robu
st II
Seed
Res
earc
h of
OR
110
108
109(
2)Ro
cket
Seed
Res
earc
h of
OR
106
108
107(
2)Ro
jo D
iabl
oGr
eat P
lain
s99
101
100(
2)Ro
yal R
edFF
R/So
u.St
.10
892
9196
97(4
)Ru
stle
rO
regr
o Se
eds
8310
184
9499
104
94(6
)Sc
arle
tD
airy
land
95–
Sien
naGr
eat P
lain
s91
106
99(2
)So
lidPr
oduc
tion
Serv
ice
9710
298
8479
9887
8676
105
8491
(11)
SS-0
303R
CGFF
R/So
u.St
.10
6–
Star
fire
Ampa
c Se
ed97
9399
9895
96(5
)St
arfir
e II
Cal/W
est &
Am
pac
101
111
112
110
112
115
111
110(
7)Tr
iple
Trus
t 350
ABI A
lfalfa
101
9292
95(3
)Ve
sna
DLF
-Jen
ks53
9675
(2)
Wild
cat
Bret
t You
ng S
eeds
101
107
9810
2(3)
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 re
port
for t
he fi
nal
year
of e
ach
spec
ific
tria
l. Fo
r exa
mpl
e, th
e Le
ton
tria
l pla
nted
in 2
000
was
har
vest
ed 3
yea
rs, s
o th
e fin
al re
port
wou
ld b
e “20
02 R
ed a
nd W
hite
Clo
ver R
epor
t” ar
chiv
ed in
the
KY F
orag
e w
ebsit
e 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.
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 live-stock 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 alka-loids, 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 detrimental 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 varieties are released and promoted. Annual ryegrass is productive for four to six months and is used primarily 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 fes-cue. 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. Tetraploids 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 persis-tence, and are more tolerant to heavy grazing. 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. Timo-thy is primarily harvested as hay, particularly for horses. In Kentucky, timothy behaves like a short-lived perennial, with stands lasting two to four 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 summers. Kentucky bluegrass is best suited for pastures where a dense sod is more important than high-forage production (e.g., horse pastures).
4
Tabl
e 3.
Sum
mar
y of
Ken
tuck
y al
falfa
yie
ld tr
ials
200
0-20
14 (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
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
0105
0809
1111
603
0603
BwFw
AnPR
RAP
H5y
r85y
r5y
r7y
r6y
r3y
r4y
r5y
r5y
r6y
r4y
r4y
r3y
r4y
r4y
rA-
4440
Prod
ucer
s Cho
ice
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
100
9910
0(2)
A 52
25Pr
oduc
ers C
hoic
e5
HRHR
HRHR
R10
410
710
6(2)
AC L
ongv
iew
New
field
See
ds–
HR–
––
–83
–Ad
rena
linBr
ett Y
oung
See
ds4
HRHR
HRHR
HR10
4–
Alfa
graz
e 30
0 RR
Amer
ica’s
Alfa
lfa3
HRR
HRHR
HR10
094
97(2
)Am
erist
and
403T
Amer
ica’s
Alfa
lfa3
HRHR
HRHR
HR99
9110
197
100
101
107
99(7
)Am
erist
and
403T
Plu
sAm
eric
a’s A
lfalfa
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
94–
Amer
istan
d 40
5T R
RAm
eric
a’s A
lfalfa
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
9498
96(2
)Am
erist
and
407T
QAm
eric
a’s A
lfalfa
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
103
104
104(
2)An
chor
mat
ePr
oSee
d M
arke
ting
––
––
––
100
–Ar
c (c
ertifi
ed)
Publ
ic4
LRM
RHR
––
9196
7693
9995
8698
92(8
)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
8995
7887
8195
86(1
0)Bu
lldog
-505
Univ
. of G
A5
–HR
–R
–96
–Ca
liber
Beck
’s H
ybrid
s4
HRHR
HRHR
HR99
–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
106
9910
3(2)
DK
140
Mon
sant
o4
HRHR
HRHR
HR95
100
98(2
)D
KA-4
1-18
RRM
onsa
nto
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
106
9710
110
1(3)
DKA
43-
13M
onsa
nto
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
102
–D
KA 5
0-18
Mon
sant
o5
HRHR
HRHR
HR11
0–
DG4
210
Crop
Pro
duct
ion
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
101
–D
ynag
ro E
verla
stUn
ited
Agr.
Prod
.4
HRHR
HRHR
R10
110
110
1(2)
Enfo
rcer
FFR/
So. S
tate
s.4
HRHR
HRHR
HR90
8286
(2)
Esca
lade
Allie
d Se
eds
5HR
HRHR
HRHR
106
–Ev
erm
ore
FFR/
So. S
tate
s.5
HRHR
HRHR
HR10
510
110
310
3(3)
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
3–
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
–continued
5
Tabl
e 3.
(con
tinue
d)
Varie
tyPr
oprie
tor
Varie
ty C
hara
cter
istic
s1Le
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
0105
0809
1111
603
0603
BwFw
AnPR
RAP
H5y
r85y
r5y
r7y
r6y
r3y
r4y
r5y
r5y
r6y
r4y
r4y
r3y
r4y
r4y
rPh
irst
UniS
outh
Gen
etic
s4
HRHR
HRHR
R10
510
210
4(2)
Phoe
nix
FFR/
So. S
tate
s.5
HRHR
HRHR
R11
399
102
101
9496
101(
6)Ra
dian
ce H
DAm
pac
Seed
/Cisc
o4
HRHR
HRHR
HR10
510
310
4(2)
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
510
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
8693
9295
8892
8299
8995
90(1
4)Su
mm
er G
old
Beck
’s H
ybrid
s4
HRHR
HRHR
HR10
7–
Trip
leTr
ust 4
50AB
I Alfa
lfa5
HRHR
HRHR
HR10
010
510
3(2)
Trip
leTr
ust 5
00Ce
ntra
l Far
m S
uppl
y5
HRHR
HRHR
HR10
6–
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
100
8711
498
(5)
WL
319H
QW
-L R
esea
rch
3HR
HRHR
HRHR
108
–W
L 32
7W
-L R
esea
rch
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
105
–W
L 33
8SR
W-L
Res
earc
h4
HRHR
HRHR
HR10
1–
WL
343H
QW
-L R
esea
rch
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
101
110
100
104(
3)W
L 34
8AP
W-L
Res
earc
h4
HRHR
HRHR
HR99
–W
L 35
4HQ
W-L
Res
earc
h4
HRHR
HRHR
HR11
5–
WL
355R
RW
-L R
esea
rch
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
103
100
102
101(
3)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
103
105
104(
3)4m
76FF
R/So
u. S
t.4.
7HR
HRR
HRR
116
–5-
star
Crop
lan
Gen.
5R
HRR
RR
9799
98(2
)53
H92
Pion
eer
3HR
HRHR
HRHR
96–
54R0
2 RR
Pion
eer
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
105
107
106(
2)54
Q32
Pion
eer
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
97–
54V4
6Pi
onee
r4
RHR
HRHR
R99
–55
V48
Pion
eer
5HR
HRHR
HRHR
104
–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
109
102
106(
2)65
30N
EXGR
OW
5HR
HRHR
HRHR
92–
6552
NEX
GRO
W5
HRHR
HRHR
HR10
5–
1 Va
riety
cha
ract
erist
ics:
FD =
fall
dorm
ancy
, Bw
= b
acte
rial w
ilt, F
w =
fusa
rium
wilt
, An
= an
thra
cnos
e, P
RR =
phy
toph
thor
a ro
ot ro
t, AP
H-ap
hano
myc
es ro
ot ro
t. In
form
atio
n pr
ovid
ed b
y se
ed co
mpa
nies
.2
The
Bow
ling
Gree
n te
st is
on
soil
infe
sted
with
phy
toph
thor
a an
d ap
hano
myc
es ro
ot ro
ts.
3 D
iseas
e re
sista
nce:
S =
susc
eptib
le, L
R =
low
resis
tanc
e, M
R =
mod
erat
e re
sista
nce,
R =
resis
tanc
e, H
R =
high
resis
tanc
e.4
Year
tria
l was
est
ablis
hed.
5 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
fin
al 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
200
2 w
as h
arve
sted
for 5
yea
rs, s
o th
e fin
al y
ield
repo
rt w
ould
be “
2006
Alfa
lfa R
epor
t” ar
chiv
ed in
the
KY F
orag
e w
ebsit
e at
<w
ww
.uky
.edu
/Ag/
Fora
ge>.
6 Th
is is
a Ro
undu
p Re
ady
alfa
lfa tr
ial.
7 M
ean
only
pre
sent
ed w
hen
resp
ectiv
e va
riety
was
incl
uded
in tw
o or
mor
e tr
ials.
8 N
umbe
r of y
ears
of d
ata.
6
Tabl
e 4.
Sum
mar
y of
Ken
tuck
y ta
ll fe
scue
yie
ld tr
ials
199
9-20
14 (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
)99
1,2
0103
0507
0911
1298
0002
0406
0810
1299
0103
052-
yr4
3-yr
2-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
2-yr
2-yr
2-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
2-yr
2-yr
2-yr
2-yr
4-yr
Atla
sPr
oSee
ds M
arke
ting
107
8998
(2)
Atla
s Sel
ect
ProS
eeds
Mar
ketin
g96
–Ap
rilia
ProS
eeds
Mar
ketin
g94
–Ba
rElit
eBa
renb
rug
USA
9910
092
97(3
)Ba
riane
Bare
nbru
g US
A87
9995
94(3
)Ba
role
xBa
renb
rug
USA
90–
BarO
ptim
a PL
US E
34Ba
renb
rug
USA
122
101
107
109
9910
210
7(6)
BAR
9 TM
POBa
renb
rug
USA
9697
97(2
)Br
onso
nAm
pac
Seed
8810
010
510
297
101
9110
298
(8)
Bull
Impr
oved
For
ages
9810
210
010
210
498
9710
0(7)
Caju
n II
Smith
See
d Se
rvic
es97
101
99(2
)Ca
rmin
eD
LF In
tern
atio
nal
9997
98(2
)Co
wgi
rlRo
se-A
griS
eeds
9410
210
099
99(4
)D
LF-B
DLF
Inte
rnat
iona
l96
–D
uraM
ax G
OLD
DLF
Inte
rnat
iona
l10
210
610
4(2)
Enha
nce
Allie
d Se
ed93
107
100(
2)Es
tanc
ia A
rkSh
ield
Mou
ntai
n Vi
ew S
eeds
102
102
101
101
102(
4)Fe
stiv
alPi
ckse
ed W
est
107
102
107
105(
3)Fl
ouris
hAl
lied
Seed
9310
398
(2)
Fueg
oAd
vant
a Se
eds
99–
Golia
thAm
pac
Seed
100
9910
0(2)
Hoed
own
DLF
Inte
rnat
iona
l10
410
610
5(2)
HyM
ark
Fras
er S
eeds
9110
297
(2)
Jesu
p EF
Penn
ingt
on S
eed
9810
710
610
310
010
3(5)
Jesu
p M
axQ
Penn
ingt
on S
eed
9810
411
010
310
094
9510
098
100
102
100(
11)
John
ston
ePr
oSee
ds M
arke
ting
9510
895
99(3
)KE
NHY
KY A
gric
Exp
Sta
.89
–Ke
ntuc
ky 3
2O
regr
o Se
eds
9396
9994
101
97(5
)Ko
kane
eAm
pac
Seed
8986
88(2
)continued 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. 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. 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 Web site 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 Forage Identification and Use Guide
(AGR-175) y Lime and Fertilizer Recommendations
(AGR-1)
7
Tabl
e 4.
(con
tinue
d)
Varie
tyPr
oprie
tor
Lexi
ngto
nPr
ince
ton
Qui
cksa
ndM
ean3
(#tr
ials
)99
1,2
0103
0507
0911
1298
0002
0406
0810
1299
0103
052-
yr4
3-yr
2-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
2-yr
2-yr
2-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
2-yr
2-yr
2-yr
2-yr
4-yr
KY31
+5KY
Agr
ic E
xp S
ta.
102
118
112
108
105
102
9399
122
108
104
104
9311
210
010
712
498
110
106(
19)
Max
imiz
eTu
rf-S
eed
9695
105
9397
(4)
Mar
tin2
647
DLF
Inte
rnat
iona
l10
4–
Nan
ryo
Jap.
Gra
ssla
nd F
orag
e Se
ed/
USDA
-ARS
, El R
eno,
OK
99–
Nor
iaPr
oSee
ds M
arke
ting
100
–RA
D-E
RF50
Radi
x Re
sear
ch, I
nc.
113
–Re
solu
teAm
pac
Seed
9065
78(2
)Sa
vory
DLF
Inte
rnat
iona
l92
–Se
ine
Adva
nta
Seed
s99
9698
(2)
Sele
ctFF
R/So
u. S
t.10
610
694
9910
298
9010
010
510
597
105
102
105
9910
010
711
210
291
101(
20)
Stoc
kman
Seed
Res
earc
h of
OR
108
101
9810
510
3(4)
Teto
n II
Mou
ntai
n Vi
ew S
eeds
107
103
100
103(
3)Te
xom
a M
axQ
IIPe
nnin
gton
See
d95
–TF
0203
GSe
ed R
esea
rch
of O
R90
–TF
33Ba
renb
rug
USA
70–
Tow
er 6
47D
LF In
tern
atio
nal
98–
Tusc
any
Fora
ge G
enet
ics
112
–Tu
scan
y II
Seed
Res
earc
h of
OR
101
9810
6–
Vulc
anIn
tern
atio
nal S
eeds
97–
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 fo
r th
e fin
al 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
199
9 w
as h
arve
sted
2 y
ears
, so
the
final
repo
rt w
ould
be “
2001
Tall
Fesc
ue R
epor
t” ar
chiv
ed in
the
KY F
orag
e w
ebsit
e 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.
5 KY
31+
cont
ains
the
toxi
c en
doph
yte.
Jesu
p M
axQ,
Texo
ma
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 no
n-to
xic
endo
phyt
e. B
arO
ptim
a PL
US E
34 co
ntai
ns a
ben
efici
al e
ndop
hyte
. Th
e ot
her f
escu
e va
rietie
s in
this
tabl
e do
not
cont
ain
an e
ndop
hyte
.
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 fertilized with 60 pounds of actual N per acre in March, after the first cut-ting, 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 recommendations. The tests were harvested using a sickle-type forage plot harvester to simulate a spring cut hay/summer grazing/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 recommendations. 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
8
Tabl
e 5.
Sum
mar
y of
Ken
tuck
y or
char
dgra
ss y
ield
tria
ls 1
999-
2014
(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
)19
991,
220
0120
0320
0620
0720
0920
1120
1219
9820
0020
0220
0420
0620
0820
1020
1219
9920
0120
0320
0520
102-
yr4
2-yr
3-yr
4-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
2-yr
2-yr
2-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
2-yr
2-yr
2-yr
3-yr
4-yr
3-yr
Aber
top
Penn
ingt
on71
–Al
bert
Univ
. of W
is.10
310
610
5(2)
Amba
DLF
Inte
rnat
iona
l See
ds96
8088
(2)
Amba
ssad
orD
LF In
tern
atio
nal S
eeds
95–
Ambr
osia
Amer
ican
Gra
ss S
eed
Prod
.90
–At
hos
DLF
Inte
rnat
iona
l See
ds98
105
102(
2)Be
nchm
ark
FFR/
Sou.
St.
103
101
9711
310
610
4(5)
Benc
hmar
k Pl
usFF
R/So
u. S
t.10
010
810
510
697
107
107
104
102
109
107
102
9410
4(13
)Bo
one
Publ
ic10
310
410
4(2)
Bron
cGr
assla
nd W
est
98–
Boun
tyAl
lied
Seed
101
9810
0(2)
Cent
ury
Seed
Res
earc
h of
Ore
gon
9810
410
1(2)
Chec
kmat
eSe
ed R
esea
rch
of O
rego
n10
211
310
310
6(3)
Chris
toss
Pros
eeds
Mar
ketin
g92
–Co
mm
and
Seed
Res
earc
h of
Ore
gon
87–
Crow
nD
onle
y Se
ed10
197
105
101
105
9710
1(6)
Crow
n Ro
yale
Don
ley
Seed
110
–Cr
own
Roya
le P
lus
Don
ley
Seed
108
9710
3(2)
East
woo
dAm
pac
Seed
8686
86(2
)El
sieRo
se-A
griS
eed
8498
9891
(2)
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
210
398
101
9610
0(6)
Harv
esta
rCo
lum
bia
Seed
s91
9710
610
099
(4)
Haym
aste
rFF
R/So
u. S
t.94
102
9796
(2)
Haym
ate
FFR/
Sou.
St.
106
9310
010
610
810
410
310
3(7)
Icon
Seed
Res
earc
h of
Ore
gon
105
9810
2(2)
Inte
nsiv
Bare
nbru
g10
2–
Lazu
lyPr
osee
ds M
arke
ting
97–
continuedgrowth. 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.
9
Tabl
e 5.
(con
tinue
d)
Varie
tyPr
oprie
tor
Lexi
ngto
nPr
ince
ton
Qui
cksa
ndM
ean3
(#tr
ials
)19
991,
220
0120
0320
0620
0720
0920
1120
1219
9820
0020
0220
0420
0620
0820
1020
1219
9920
0120
0320
0520
102-
yr4
2-yr
3-yr
4-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
2-yr
2-yr
2-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
3-yr
2-yr
2-yr
2-yr
3-yr
4-yr
3-yr
LG-3
1D
LF In
tern
atio
nal S
eeds
92–
Mam
mot
hD
LF In
tern
atio
nal S
eeds
102
104
103(
2)M
egab
iteTu
rf-S
eed
9410
510
610
110
2(4)
Niv
aD
LF In
tern
atio
nal S
eeds
81–
Paiu
teD
LF In
tern
atio
nal S
eeds
108
–Pe
rsist
Smith
See
d12
310
510
610
711
210
810
110
510
310
810
110
210
7(12
)Po
tom
acPu
blic
104
103
9695
9810
810
198
9994
99(1
0)Pr
airie
Turn
er S
eed
101
107
101
109
106
113
9510
410
010
499
103
102
105
107
120
105(
16)
Prod
igy
Caud
ill S
eed
101
9910
310
110
1(4)
Profi
tAm
pac
Seed
107
9698
107
103
102
103
115
103(
8)RA
D-L
CF 2
5Ra
dix
Rese
arch
9910
210
1(2)
Rene
gade
Gras
sland
Wes
t95
–Sh
awne
eRo
se-A
griS
eed
86–
Shilo
hPr
osee
ds M
arke
ting
109
–Sh
iloh
IIPr
osee
ds M
arke
ting
117
–Sp
anish
Pin
kD
LF In
tern
atio
nal S
eeds
82–
Span
ish R
edD
LF In
tern
atio
nal S
eeds
101
9498
(2)
Take
naSm
ith S
eed
107
100
108
105(
3)Te
kena
IISm
ith S
eed
110
102
109
106
104
106(
5)Te
kapo
Ampa
c Se
ed88
9181
8278
8398
8692
8194
9210
591
8188
(15)
Tuck
erO
regr
o Se
eds
9696
102
9685
95(5
)Ud
der
Impr
oved
For
ages
100
107
102
102
106
9910
3(6)
Vaill
iant
Pros
eeds
Mar
ketin
g96
–Vi
sion
Crop
mar
k Se
eds
6367
65(2
)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
fin
al 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
199
9 w
as h
arve
sted
2 y
ears
, so
the
final
repo
rt w
ould
be “
2001
Orc
hard
gras
s Rep
ort”
arch
ived
in th
e KY
For
age
web
site
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.
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 2014 reports on the forage Web site. See below for specific reports. The forage Web site contains all reports from 2001 through 2014.
Yield and Grazing Tolerance Reports Reports can be found at www.uky.edu/Ag/Forage/ForageVarietyTrials2.htm.
y 2014 Alfalfa Report (PR-676) y 2014 Red and White Clover Report
(PR-677) y 2014 Orchardgrass Report (PR-678) y 2014 Tall Fescue and Bromegrass Re-
port (PR-679) y 2014 Timothy and Kentucky Bluegrass
Report (PR-680) y 2014 Annual and Perennial Ryegrass
and Festulolium Report (PR-681) y 2014 Alfalfa Grazing Tolerance Report
(PR-682) y 2014 Red and White Clover Grazing
Tolerance Report (PR-683) y 2014 Cool-Season Grass Grazing Toler-
ance Report (PR-684) y 2014 Cool-Season Grass Horse Grazing
Report (PR-685) y 2014 Summer Annual Grass Report
(PR-686) y 2014 Long-Term Summary of Kentucky
Forage Variety Trials (PR-687)
About the AuthorsS.R. Smith and G.D. Lacefield are Ex-tension professors and G.L. Olson is a research specialist of Forages.
10
Tabl
e 6.
Sum
mar
y of
Ken
tuck
y an
nual
ryeg
rass
yie
ld tr
ials
200
0-20
14 (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
1300
0200
03Ab
unda
ntte
trap
loid
Ampa
c Se
ed12
–Ac
roba
t–
Pros
eeds
Mar
ketin
g14
4–
AE11
0W
este
rwol
d te
trap
loid
Pick
seed
USA
, Inc
.89
100
95(2
)Am
pW
este
rwol
d te
trap
loid
Colu
mbi
a Se
eds
76–
Andy
Wes
terw
old
tetr
aplo
idD
LF In
tern
atio
nal
97–
Assis
tW
este
rwol
d di
ploi
dSa
ddle
Butt
e90
–At
tain
Wes
terw
old
tetr
aplo
idSm
ith S
eed
Serv
ices
111
53–
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
Bare
nbru
g US
A13
310
399
118(
2)Bi
g Bo
ssW
este
rwol
d te
trap
loid
Smith
See
d Se
rvic
es98
8638
92(2
)Bi
g D
addy
Wes
terw
old
tetr
aplo
idFF
R/So
u. S
t.86
9882
8887
9189
(6)
Bran
gus
Italia
n di
ploi
dKB
See
dSol
utio
ns94
–Br
uise
rW
este
rwol
d di
ploi
dAm
pac
Seed
6510
510
010
486
100
92(5
)Co
mm
on–
Publ
ic83
8784
8284
(4)
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
–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
5312
790
(7)
Flyi
ng A
Wes
terw
old
dipl
oid
Ore
gro
Seed
s39
59–
Fox
Italia
n di
ploi
dD
LF In
tern
atio
nal
109
–Fr
iaW
este
rwol
d di
ploi
dAl
lied
Seed
9587
8910
39(
3)GR
-AS1
0Ita
lian
Ampa
c Se
ed11
3–
Graz
e-N
-Gro
Wes
terw
old
dipl
oid
Seed
Res
earc
h of
OR
114
6710
094
(3)
Gulf
Wes
terw
old
dipl
oid
Publ
ic67
2687
7876
7227
7979
7671
(9)
Herc
ules
Wes
terw
old
tetr
aplo
idBa
renb
rug
USA
9174
108
100(
2)HS
-1Ita
lian
dipl
oid
KB S
eedS
olut
ions
72–
Jack
son
Wes
terw
old
dipl
oid
The
Wax
Co.
6610
062
103
5910
199
106
106
9191
7770
9090
91(1
3)continued
11
Tabl
e 6.
(con
tinue
d)
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
1300
0200
03Ju
mbo
Wes
terw
old
tetr
aplo
idBa
renb
rug
USA
112
9710
5(2)
KB R
oyal
Italia
n di
ploi
dKB
See
dSol
utio
ns83
–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(
15)
Max
imo
Inte
rmed
iate
tetr
aplo
idPi
ckse
ed U
SA, I
nc.
101
–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
89(3
)Pa
sser
el P
lus
Wes
terw
old
dipl
oid
Penn
ingt
on S
eed
103
–Pr
imec
utW
este
rwol
d br
and
Ore
gro
Seed
s94
–Ri
oW
este
rwol
d di
ploi
d–
9899
9096
(3)
Spar
kte
trap
loid
DLF
Inte
rnat
iona
l73
–St
ocka
iddi
ploi
d–
82–
Strik
erW
este
rwol
d te
trap
loid
Seed
Res
earc
h of
OR
90–
TAM
TBO
Italia
n te
trap
loid
Tex.
Ag
Exp
Sta.
4710
110
895
88(4
)Ta
m 9
0Ita
lian
dipl
oid
Tex.
Ag
Exp
Sta.
4988
84(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
43–
Win
terh
awk
Wes
terw
old
dipl
oid
Ore
gro
Seed
s10
411
792
104(
3)W
inte
r Sta
rIta
lian
tetr
aplo
idAm
pac
Seed
99–
Zorro
Italia
n te
trap
loid
DLF
Inte
rnat
iona
l13
213
410
412
3(3)
1 In
ann
ual r
yegr
ass,
low
yie
ldin
g va
rietie
s usu
ally
resu
lt fro
m w
inte
rkill
. Not
e: D
ue to
seve
re w
inte
rkill
, yie
ld re
sults
from
the
2006
and
201
3 pl
antin
gs w
ere
not i
nclu
ded
in th
e ov
eral
l mea
n.
2 Ye
ar tr
ial w
as e
stab
lishe
d.3
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
final
yea
r of e
ach
spec
ific
tria
l. Fo
r exa
mpl
e, th
e Le
ton
tria
l pla
nted
in 2
003
was
har
vest
ed 1
yea
r, so
the
final
repo
rt w
ould
be “
2004
Ann
ual a
nd P
eren
nial
Rye
gras
s Rep
ort”
arch
ived
in th
e KY
For
age
web
site
at <
ww
w.
uky.e
du/A
g/Fo
rage
>.4
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.5
Thes
e ar
e Ti
llage
Root
Max
that
incl
uded
crim
son
clov
er a
nd/o
r till
age
radi
sh.
12
Table 7. Summary of Kentucky Timothy Yield Trials 2000-2014 (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 99 01 00 042yr4 3yr 4yr 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 91 104 97(3)Barpenta Barenbrug USA 74 82 84 80(3)Clair Ky Agric. Exp. Station 109 115 107 95 108 104 112 95 108 122 108(10)Classic Cebeco International Seeds 100 88 87 92(3)Climax Canada Agr. Res. Station 79 102 105 98 102 98 97(6)Colt FFR Cooperative 105 101 90 112 99 101(5)Common Public 96 –Comtral Caudill Seed 94 –Derby FFR Cooperative 112 111 106 112 108 124 112(6)Dolina DLF-Trifolium 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)Summit Allied Seed, L.L.C. 114 –Talon Seed Research of Oregon 110 112 108 106 107 109(5)Treasure Seed Research of Oregon 103 115 103 101 111 107(5)Tundra DLF-Trifolium 95 –Tuukka Ampac Seed Company 95 90 92 93 93(4)
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 2000 was harvested 2 years, so the final report would be “2002 Timothy 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 1996-2014 (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 Mean3
(#trials)3yr4 2yr 3yr 4yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 2yrAdam 1 Radix Research 98 –Barderby Barenbrug USA 94 101 91 98 89 95(5)Big Blue Rose-AgriSeed 82 92 87(2)Common Public 71 66 68 68(3)Ginger ProSeeds Marketing 89 118 119 114 118 112 107 113 111(8)Kenblue Public 90 102 133 96 95 120 106(6)Lato Turf Seed Inc. 110 122 116(2)Park Public 86 –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 2004 was harvested 3 years, so the final report would be “2007 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.
13
Table 9. Summary of Kentucky perennial ryegrass yield trials 1999-2014 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).
Variety Type Proprietor
Lexington PrincetonBowling
GreenMean3,4
(#trials)991,2 01 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 00 02 00 032yr5 2yr 2yr 3yr 3yr 2yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 2yr 3yr 2yr 2yr 3yr 2yr 2yr
Aires diploid Ampac Seed 95 93 94(2)Amazon tetraploid AgriBioTech 108 99 107 104(3)Anaconda tetraploid Caudill Seed 113 95 103 104(3)Aubisque tetraploid Seed Research of OR 144 99 122(2)Bandit tetraploid Grassland West 106 114 110(2)Bastion C-2 tetraploid Seed Research of OR 91 –Bestfor tetraploid Improved Forages 113 107 120 113(3)Best for Plus hybrid tetraploid Improved Forages 116 108 118 136 120(4)BG-34 diploid Barenbrug USA 83 85 86 87 85(4)Bison hybrid tetraploid International Seeds 140 –Boost tetraploid Allied Seed 130 125 120 143 110 104 122(6)Boxer tetraploid AgriBioTech 121 106 114(2)Calibra tetraploid DLF International 96 109 81 99 103 112 100(6)CAS MP64 diploid Cascade International 97 –Citadel tetraploid Ag Canada 101 94 113 103 103(4)Crave tetraploid Ampac Seed 100 –Derby – Public 74 –Elena DS tetraploid Allied Seed 110 –Eurostar tetraploid Seed Research of OR 112 –Feeder diploid Seed Research of OR 76 –Grand Daddy tetraploid Smith Seed 118 101 109 76 92 84 90 111 98(8)Green Gold tetraploid Grasslands Oregon 96 –Herbal – ProSeeds Marketing 77 –Impressario tetraploid DLF International 107 89 98(2)Kentaur tetraploid DLF International 106 –Lactal tetraploid Brett Young 102 –Lasso diploid DLF International 98 –LHT-102 tetraploid Ampac Seed 119 –Linn diploid Public 87 98 98 102 98 85 84 101 92 93 83 87 88 77 91(14)Manhatten diploid – 85 –Mara diploid Barenbrug USA 85 –Matrix diploid Cropmark seeds 77 64 –Maverick Gold hybrid tetraploid Ampac Seed 97 71 84(2)Orantas diploid DLF International 82 –Ortet tetraploid Oregro Seeds 114 –PayDay tetraploid Mountain View Seeds 103 –Polly II tetraploid FFR/Sou. St. 104 110 125 113(3)Polly Plus hybrid tetraploid Allied Seed 64 60 62(2)Power tetraploid Ampac Seed 110 103 102 100 109 97 104(6)Polim tetraploid DLF International 106 –Quartermaster tetraploid Radix Research 122 –Quartet tetraploid Ampac Seed 97 56 46 113 78(4)RAD-CPS212 hybrid tetraploid Radix Research 134 –RAD-MI125 hybrid tetraploid Mountain View Seeds 120 –Sampson diploid International Seeds 87 –Sierra diploid Lewis Seed Co. 89 –TetraGain tetraploid Pure Seed 114 –TetraMag tetraploid Mountain View Seeds 111 –Tonga tetraploid Kings AgriSeeds 96 103 100( 2)Verseka tetraploid Allied Seed 89 –Yatsyn diploid Barenbrug USA 80 89 85(2)
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 1999 was harvested 2 years, so the final report would be “2001 Annual and Perennial Ryegrass 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 In perennial ryegrass, low yielding varieties usually result from winterkill or summer mortality.5 Number of years of data.
14
Table 10. Summary of Kentucky festulolium yield trials 1999-2014 (yield shown as a percentage of the mean of the commercial varieties in the trial).1
Variety Type2 Proprietor
Lexington Princeton QuicksandMean5
(#trials)19993,4 2001 2003 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2000 2001 2003
2yr6 3yr 2yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 3yr 2yr 2yr 2yr 2yrAgula MF x IR Allied Seed 94 –Barfest MF x PR Barenbrug USA 105 101 107 104(3)Bonus MF x IR Allied Seed 93 46 36 58(3)Duo MF x PR Ampac Seed 104 84 103 99 95 106 104 99(7)Felina (TF x IR) x TF DLF International 101 132 118 125 125(3)Fojtan (TF x IR) x TF DLF International 112 101 115 109(3)Gain MF x IR Allied Seed 103 77 56 79(3)Hostyn MF xIR DLF International 110 −Hykor (TF x IR) x TF DLF International 98 133 141 141 98 128(4)Lofa (TF x Int) x Int DLF International 105 107 112 108(3)Mahulena (TF x IR) x TF DLF International 120 −Meadow Green
− Pure Seed 45 −
Perseus MF x IR DLF International 132 114 129 125(3)Perun MF x IR DLF International 127 114 111 117(3)Spring Green MF x PR Turf-Seed 88 105 100 114 101 113 112 116 97 105(9)Sweet Tart MF x IR ProSeeds Marketing 88 82 63 71 76(4)Vorage − Improved Forages 99 –
1 The festuloliums were in fescue trials from1999-2005.2 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 1999 was harvested 2 years, so the final report would be “2001 Tall Fescue 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 2008-2014 (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
All trials are 1 year yieldsAS9301 BMR4 Alta Seeds/Ramer Seed 118 −Enorma BMR Cal/West Seeds 99 94 92 91 83 92(5)Hayking BMR Central Farm Supply 111 112 91 97 97 96 92 99(7)Monarch V Public 104 96 102 97 93 98 110 100(7)Piper Public 90 91 97 94 104 105 89 96(7)ProMax BMR Ampac Seed 95 101 110 115 96 103 100 103(7)SS130 BMR Cal/West Seeds 101 103 107 106 104(4)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.
15
Table 12. Summary of Kentucky sorghum-sudangrass yield trials 2008-2014 (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
All trials are 1 year yieldsAS6402 BMR4 Alta Seeds/Ramer Seed 91 −AS6503 BMR6 Alta Seeds/Ramer Seed 96 103 100(2)FSG 208 BMR Farm Science Genetics 75 −FSG 214 BMR6 Farm Science Genetics 99 108 104(2)Greengrazer V Farm Science Genetics 166 122 107 131(3)GW300 BMR Gayland Ward Seed 88 78 88 81 84(4)HyGain Turner Seed 104 105 118 109(3)MS 202 BMR Farm Science Genetics 106 −NutraPlus BMR Cisco 106 97 94 103 106 109 106 103(7)Sordan Headless Chromatin 105 −Special Effort Cisco 109 110 93 94 115 120 91 105(7)SS211 Southern States 104 93 114 103 104(4)SS220 BMR Southern States 107 84 112 101(3)Surpass BMR-6 Turner Seed 81 80 64 75(3)Super Sugar Gayland Ward Seed 102 117 107 109(3)Super Sugar Delayed maturity Gayland Ward Seed 101 −Super Sugar Sterile Gayland Ward Seed 94 −Sweet-For-Ever Gayland Ward Seed 110 107 81 99(3)Sweet-For-Ever BMR Gayland Ward Seed 78 70 74(2)SweetSix BMR Gayland Ward Seed 93 101 97(2)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 teff yield trials 2008-2014 (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
All trials are 1 year yieldsCorvallis 94 112 81 101 91 101 96 100 110 98(9)Dessie 102 87 99 92 96 94 95 97 101 96(9)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 94(9)Moxie 94 96 95(2)Pharaoh 95 101 105 85 106 106 97 101 93 99(9)Rooiberg 102 107 112 109 113 108 115 102 88 106(9)Summer Delight
90 91 96 88 93 100 119 97(7)
Tiffany 102 106 102 93 82 93 102 98 104 98(9)VA T1 Brown 89 99 87 91 94 98 104 95(7)Velvet 94 100 97 98 95 103 95 97(7)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.
16
Table 14. Summary of 2002-2014 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 2012 Mean5
(#trials)2yr6 4yr 2yr 2yr 3yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 3yr 2yrAlice Intermediate Barenbrug USA 59 98 79(2)Barblanca Intermediate Barenbrug USA 118 91 151 120(3)Colt Intermediate Seed Research of OR 114 134 122 123(3)Crescendo Ladino Cal/West 84 72 78(2)Durana Intermediate Pennington 83 105 103 115 102 107 133 86 104(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 99 79 98(7)KY Select Intermediate KY Agr Ex. Sta./
Saddle Butte105 83 94(2)
Patriot Intermediate Pennington 110 137 122 100 111 110 121 106 115(8)Pinnacle Ladino Allied Seed 85 –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 85 86 92(8)Resolute Intermediate FFR/Southern States 101 106 65 91(3)Seminole Ladino Saddle Butte Ag. Inc. 75 97 91 88(3)Tillman II Ladino Caudill Seed 92 –WBDX Dutch Saddle Butte Ag. Inc. 70 –Will Ladino Allied Seed 117 87 107 105 108 143 113 144 116(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 2002 was grazed for 2 years so the final persistence report would be “2004 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.
Table 15. Summary of 2000-2014 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 Proprietor20001,2 2001 2003 2005 2007 2008 2010 2011 Mean3
(#trials)4yr4 3yr 4yr 3-yr 4yr 4yr 4yr 3yrAGRLP103 AgResearch USA 128 86 107(2)Aries Ampac Seed 139 –Barfest (FL) Barenbrug USA 111 104 108(2)BG 34 Barenbrug USA 1765 1455 129 110 140(4)Boost Allied Seed 101 79 97 92(3)Citadel Donley Seed 107 –Duo (FL) Ampac Seed 116 95 68 75 89(4)Grand Daddy Smith Seed Services 121 70 95 101 97(4)Lasso DLF-Jenks 130 –Linn Public 112 129 63 95 103 104 101(6)Maverick Ampac Seed 36 –Polly II FFR/Southern States 36 68 52(2)Power Ampac Seed 134 102 104 113(3)Quartet Ampac Seed 77 63 50 60(3)Remington Barenbrug USA 1515 –Spring Green (FL) Rose Agri-Seed 101 109 109 104 105(4)Tonga 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 2000 was grazed 4 years so the final report would be “2004 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.
17
Tabl
e 16
. Sum
mar
y of
Ken
tuck
y al
falfa
gra
zing
tria
ls 1
994-
2014
(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
ton
Mea
n5
(#tr
ials
)FD
Dis
ease
Res
ista
nce2
1994
3,4
1996
1997
1998
2000
2000
2001
2004
2005
2006
2008
2009
2010
2011
BwFw
AnPR
RAP
H3y
r63y
r4y
r3y
r2y
r3y
r3y
r4y
r4y
r3y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r3y
rAB
T 20
5W
-L R
esea
rch
2HR
HRHR
HRR
9484
89(2
)AB
T 35
0W
-L R
esea
rch
3HR
HRHR
HRHR
46–
ABT
405
W-L
Res
earc
h4
HRHR
HRHR
R71
129
6946
100
83(5
)Al
fagr
aze
Amer
icas
Alfa
lfa2
MR
RM
RR
–10
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
0(14
)Al
fagr
aze
300
RRAm
eric
as A
lfalfa
3HR
RHR
HRHR
125
–Am
erig
raze
401
+ZAm
eric
as A
lfalfa
4HR
HRHR
HRR
120
5356
2685
125
78(6
)Am
erist
and
403T
Amer
icas
Alfa
lfa4
HRHR
HRHR
HR14
114
450
9110
7(4)
Amer
istan
d 40
3T P
lus
Amer
icas
Alfa
lfa4
HRHR
HRHR
HR13
311
912
6(2)
Amer
istan
d 40
7TQ
Amer
icas
Alfa
lfa4
HRHR
HRHR
HR13
650
102
95(3
)Ap
ollo
Amer
icas
Alfa
lfa4
RR
RR
–48
7533
4717
3125
3627
2517
2771
36(1
3)Ar
c (c
ertifi
ed)
Publ
ic4
LRM
RHR
––
38–
Arch
er II
IAm
eric
as A
lfalfa
5HR
HRHR
HRHR
3312
177
(2)
Bara
lfa 5
4Ba
renb
rug
USA
–R
HRHR
HRHR
78–
Cut-
n-Gr
aze
Amer
icas
Alfa
lfa3
HRHR
HRHR
R68
–FK
421
Don
ley
Seed
Co.
4HR
H H
HH
100
–Fe
ast
Gars
t See
ds3
HRHR
HRHR
R14
687
9210
8(3)
Fort
ress
Syng
enta
3R
RR
HRR
4071
56(2
)Go
ld P
lus
PGI A
lfalfa
4HR
HRHR
HRR
81–
Graz
ekin
gFF
R/So
uthe
rn S
tate
s5
MR
HRHR
RS
9141
5061
(3)
Hayg
raze
rGr
eat P
lain
s Res
earc
h4
HRHR
RR
MR
7539
3851
(3)
Inte
grity
PGI A
lfalfa
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
172
–Le
gacy
Gree
n Se
ed4
RR
RR
R32
–Le
genD
airy
5.0
Crop
lan
Gene
tics
3HR
HRHR
HRHR
011
256
(2)
Mag
nagr
aze
Dai
ryla
nd S
eed
Co.
3HR
HRR
HR–
56–
Past
ure
Plus
MBS
3HR
HRR
HRM
R60
–PG
I 424
Prod
ucer
s Cho
ice
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
45–
PGI 4
59Pr
oduc
ers C
hoic
e4
HRHR
HRHR
HR17
106
62(2
)Pi
onee
r 98
Pion
eer
3HR
RHR
R–
56–
ProG
roM
BS In
c.4
HRHR
RHR
MR
81–
Qua
ntum
ABI A
lfalfa
2HR
HRHR
HRR
71–
Rebe
lTa
rget
See
d4
HRHR
HRHR
HR79
–Ru
gged
Targ
et S
eed
3HR
HRHR
HRHR
146
–Ru
shm
ore
Syng
enta
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
32–
Sara
nac
AR (c
ert.)
Publ
ic4
MR
RHR
LR–
7710
089
(2)
Spre
dor 3
Syng
enta
1HR
HRR
MR
S71
123
7568
96(4
)Sp
redo
r 4Sy
ngen
ta2
HRHR
HRHR
R25
–St
ampe
deAl
lied
Seed
3HR
RR
HRR
73–
TS 4
007
Prod
ucer
s Cho
ice
4HR
RHR
HRHR
82–
TS 4
010/
A453
5Pr
oduc
ers C
hoic
e4
HRR
HRHR
HR83
145
125
118(
3)Tr
iple
Trus
t 450
ABI/A
mer
ica’s
Alfa
lfa5
HRHR
HRHR
HR14
5–
Win
terg
reen
ABI A
lfalfa
3HR
HRHR
HRR
9557
7275
(3)
WL
326G
ZW
-L R
esea
rch
4HR
HRHR
HRHR
118
8810
3(2)
115
Bran
dM
onsa
nto
3HR
HRR
HRR
5685
71(2
)53
73Pi
onee
r4
HRHR
HRT
MR
LR21
–54
32Pi
onee
r4
HRHR
–M
R–
51–
1 Va
riety
cha
ract
erist
ics:
FD =
fall
dorm
ancy
, Bw
= b
acte
rial w
ilt, F
w =
fusa
rium
wilt
, An
= an
thra
cnos
e, P
RR =
phy
toph
ther
a ro
ot ro
t, AP
H-ap
hano
myc
es ro
ot ro
t. In
form
atio
n pr
ovid
ed b
y se
ed co
mpa
nies
.2
Dise
ase
resis
tanc
e: S
= su
scep
tible
, LR
= lo
w re
sista
nce,
MR
= m
oder
ate
resis
tanc
e, R
= re
sista
nce,
HR
= 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 p
ersis
tenc
e ra
tings
, lo
ok 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
199
6 w
as g
raze
d fo
r 3 y
ears
so fi
nal p
ersis
tenc
e re
port
wou
ld b
e “19
99 A
lfalfa
Gra
zing
Tole
ranc
e Re
port
” arc
hive
d in
the
KY F
orag
e w
ebsit
e at
<w
ww
.uky
.edu
/Ag/
Fora
ge>.
5 M
ean
only
pre
sent
ed w
hen
resp
ectiv
e va
riety
was
incl
uded
in tw
o or
mor
e tr
ials.
6 N
umbe
r of y
ears
of d
ata.
18
Tabl
e 17
. Sum
mar
y of
199
6-20
14 K
entu
cky
tall
fesc
ue g
razi
ng to
lera
nce
tria
ls (s
tand
per
sist
ence
show
n as
a p
erce
nt o
f the
stan
d ra
ting
of K
Y 31
+).
Varie
tyPr
oprie
tor
Lexi
ngto
nPr
ince
ton
Mea
n3
(#tr
ials
)19
961,
219
9719
9819
9920
0020
0120
0220
0320
0420
0520
0620
0720
0820
0920
1020
1120
023y
r44y
r3y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r4y
r3y
r4y
rAd
vanc
e M
axQ
Penn
ingt
on S
eed
94–
Baria
neBa
renb
rug
USA
8975
4729
60(4
)Ba
rcel
Bare
nbru
g US
A92
–Ba
rElit
eBa
renb
rug
USA
96–
Baro
lex
Bare
nbru
g US
A78
101
8688
(3)
BarO
ptim
a PL
US E
34Ba
renb
rug
USA
100
9798
100
99(4
)BA
R9TM
POBa
renb
rug
USA
75–
Bron
son
Ampa
c Se
ed39
9898
78(3
)Ca
jun
IISm
ith S
eed
Serv
ices
98–
Catt
le C
lub
Gree
n Se
ed37
9870
9391
78(2
)Ca
rmin
eD
LF-J
enks
90–
Cow
girl
Rose
Agr
i-See
d99
–D
ovey
Bare
nbru
g US
A92
–Fe
stiv
alPi
ckse
ed W
est
100
101
8997
(3)
Fest
orin
aAd
vant
a Se
eds
9886
5780
(3)
Fueg
oAd
vant
a Se
eds
27–
Golia
thAm
pac
Seed
98–
Hoed
own
DLF
-Jen
ks88
–H
yMar
kFr
aser
See
ds95
100
98(2
)Je
sup
EFPe
nnin
gton
See
d63
9199
9910
090
(5)
Jesu
p M
axQ
Penn
ingt
on S
eed
114
7910
397
6810
297
9799
9810
010
596
(12)
John
ston
ePr
osee
ds65
107
9288
(3)
KY31
+5KY
Agr
i. Ex
p St
a.10
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
010
0(17
)KY
31-5
KY A
gri.
Exp
Sta.
9490
102
8498
103
9810
082
100
100
9899
9910
010
597
(16)
Kenh
yPu
blic
116
–Ko
kane
eAm
pac
Seed
43–
Mar
tin II
Inte
rnat
iona
l See
ds59
–M
axim
ize
Rose
Agr
i-See
d99
–N
anry
oJa
pane
se G
rass
land
For
.See
d10
0–
Ory
gun
–99
–Re
solu
teAm
pac
Seed
23–
Sele
ctFF
R/So
u. S
t.10
969
107
101
100
100
6710
093
9597
9910
098
95(1
4)So
uthe
rn C
ross
–25
–St
argr
azer
FFR/
Sou.
St.
9052
8689
79(4
)St
ockm
anSe
ed R
es. o
f OR
102
–TF
33Ba
renb
rug
USA
34–
Tusc
any
IISe
ed R
es. o
f OR
100
–Ve
rdan
tAm
.Gra
ss S
eed
97–
Vulc
anIn
tern
atio
nal S
eeds
109
–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 st
and
pers
isten
ce b
etw
een
varie
ties.
To fi
nd a
ctua
l per
siste
nce
ratin
gs, l
ook
in th
e ye
arly
repo
rt fo
r the
fina
l yea
r of e
ach
spec
ific
tria
l. Fo
r exa
mpl
e, th
e Le
ton
tria
l pla
nted
in in
199
7 w
as g
raze
d 4
year
s so
the
final
repo
rt w
ould
be “
2001
Coo
l-Sea
son
Gras
s Gra
zing
To
lera
nce
Repo
rt” a
rchi
ved
in th
e KY
For
age
web
site
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.5
KY 3
1- is
the
varie
ty K
Y31
from
whi
ch th
e to
xic
endo
phyt
e ha
s bee
n re
mov
ed. K
Y31+
cont
ains
the
toxi
c en
doph
yte.
Jesu
p M
axQ
and
Adv
ance
Max
Q 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
.
19
Table 18. Summary of 1998-2014 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)19981,2 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 20053 2007 2009 2010 2011 2002
3yr5 4yr 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 77(2)Benchmark FFR/Sou. States 115 94 118 123 114 133 116(6)Benchmark Plus FFR/Sou. States 120 152 135 106 106 104 133 117(6)Boone Public 131 102 117(2)Cheyenne Western Prod. Inc. 94 –Command Seed Research of OR 81 –Crown Donley Seed 96 –Crown Royale Donley Seed 100 –Crown Royale Plus Donley Seed 124 83 104(2)Hallmark James VanLeeuwen 104 103 115 113 83 104(5)Harvestar Columbia Seeds 75 89 93 86(3)Haymate FFR/Sou. States 102 96 53 115 100 118 83 95(7)Intensiv Barenbrug USA 51 –Mammoth DLF-Jenks 115 –Megabite Turf Seed 77 –Niva DLF-Jenks 76 83 80(2)Persist Smith Seed 138 107 103 100 103 103(4)Pizza Advanta Seeds 63 –Potomac Public 116 119 117 117(3)Prairie Turner Seed 127 121 102 83 108(4)Profile Scott Seed 116 –Profit Ampac Seed 95 99 98 97(3)Tekapo Ampac Seed 92 104 55 74 118 50 103 95 105 103 100 95(10)Takena Smith Seed 99 –Seco FFR/Sou. States 85 –WP300 Western Prod. Inc. 94 –
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 1999 was grazed 4 years so the final report would be “2004 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.12-2014
Mention or display of a trademark, proprietary product, or firm in text or figures does not constitute an endorsement and does not imply approval to the exclusion of other suitable products or firms.
Table 19. Summary of 1999-2014 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 Mean3
(#trials)3-yr4 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 4-yr 3-yrBarOptima PLUS E34 Barenbrug 107 101 100 103(3)Bronson Ampac Seed 80 −Cattle Club Green Seed 95 −Cowgirl Rose Agri-Seed 105 −Festorina Advanta Seed 102 −Jesup MaxQ Pennington Seed 98 78 104 97 100 100 96(6)Johnstone ProSeeds 88 −KY31+5 KY Agri. Exp.Sta. 105 102 109 120 107 101 101 100 106(8)KY31-5 KY Agri. Exp.Sta. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100(12)Nanryo Japanese Grassland For. Seed 72 −Seine Seed Research of OR 135 −Select FFR/Southern States 82 109 94 99 73 104 76 108 98 100 100 95(11)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 in 2001 was grazed 4 years so the final report would be “2005 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.
Table 20. Summary of 1999-2014 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 Mean4
(#trials)3-yr5 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 111 157 139 111 114 105 116(5)Crown Royale Grassland Oregon 95 −Crown Royale Plus Grassland Oregon 97 −Haymate FFR/Southern States 96 85 97 93(3)Persist Smith Seed 114 103 101 95 100(3)Potomac Public 117 −Prairie Turner Seed 100 −Profit Ampac Seed 93 86 90(2)Tekapo Ampac Seed 101 115 93 30 92 100 100 100(6)
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 in 2005 was grazed 4 years so the final report would be “2009 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.