Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Biological Fixation of
Atmospheric N
Plant sends
energy to
nodule
N transferred to plant
Rhizobia convert
atmospheric N to plant
usable-N
Nitrogen fixation is energy expensive.
There is a cost to the plant.
Alfalfa
MAGIC OF LEGUMES!
Short Rotation Forage Legumes
Ø Couple years of forage legume (e.g. alfalfa or clover)
followed by annual crops (e.g. cereal, oilseed).
Melfort
Lanigan
1
2
3
4
4 Rotations compared:
1) Alfalfa-Alfalfa-Wheat-Canola
2) Red Clover- Red Clover- Wheat-Canola
3) Barley-Pea-Wheat-Canola
4) Barley-Flax-Wheat -Canola
N Fertilizer Replacement Value to wheat from growing
alfalfa or clover in previous two years
(how much fertilizer N had to be added to bring yield of wheat grown on
flax stubble to the yield of wheat on legume stubble )
Sites Alfalfa-Alfalfa Clover-Clover
-------- (kg N ha-1) --------
Saskatoon 75 100
Lanigan 103 172
Melfort 317 236
■ Similar trend observed for 2013 canola but NFR values less.
■ Two years of alfalfa and red clover took up greater amounts of P from
the soil relative to barley-pea and barley-flax.
But no significant reduction in soil available P after 2 yrs
■ Maintenance of soil available P levels after two
years of forage legume, despite greater crop
removal of P in forage harvest, reflects ability of
legume to mobilize soil P, maintain fertility in short
term.
Crop P balance over a four-year rotational cycle
Fertilizer P P removed
P balance‡
Site Treatment applied in biomass
---------------------- (kg P ha-1) ------------------------
A-A-W-C† 6.6 49.4a -42.8b
RC-RC-W-C 6.6 43.2a -36.6b
Saskatoon
B-P-W-C 6.6 22.1b -15.5a
B-FL-W-C 6.6 24.7b -18.1a
Over long-term, forage legumes can deplete soil P through greater P removal
in harvest.
Summary of Findings
Nitrogen benefit
Non-N benefit
Help maintain soil P availability in short-term
Source: Glen Friesen MAFRI, 2009 “Managing Saline Areas with forages”
Objective
Evaluate effect of growing AC Saltlander
green wheatgrass alone and with three
added amendments: leonardite, humic acid,
composted manure
Fall 2019 Biomass Yield (2yrs) Fall 2019 Biomass Yield (2yrs)
2765 kg ha-1 + 633 kg ha-1 2613 kg ha-1 + 1036 kg ha-1
Findings to date
Plants
• Above ground biomass yield of AC Saltlander on non-
saline site was 4 to 5x higher than on saline site in year of
establishment. Difference diminishing in subsequent years:
green wheat grass “catching up” on saline site. We are
getting a palatable forage to grow on salt affected land!
Source: http://blog.uvm.edu/pasture-vtpasture/
Main Objective
Assess the impact of two annual swath grazing
systems (novel polycrop mixture vs traditional
barley monoculture) on forage yield, water
extractable and total soil organic C and N in a field
located in east-central Saskatchewan at
Termuende Farm, Lanigan.
Polycrop Mixture
• “Ultimate Annual Blend” with forage peas (Pisum sativa cv. 4010)
§ Provided in-kind by Union Forage
Fig. 1. Forage above-ground dry biomass yield (T ha-1) of grazing systems over 2 yr.
Change in Total SOC Mass After 2 Growing Seasons
Figure 4. Change in TOC (Mg ha-1) measured at two depths in the grazing
systems from Spring 2017 to Fall 2018 in landscape positions.
Below-Ground Root Biomass Yield in Fall 2018
Figure 5. Root biomass yield (T ha-1) measured in the grazing systems in Fall
2018 according to slope position.
Observations
§ Legumes in a grazing system enhance soil N
pools and contribute to N fertility.
§ Increases in total soil organic carbon mass in the
5-20 cm depth were observed from beginning to
end of the 2 yr study in upslope locations of the
polycrop mixture treatment.
§ Effects are better explained by below-ground
biomass (roots) than above.