Abstract
Field pea [ Pisum sativum L. subsp. sativum var. arvense (L.) Poir] appears to hold promise as a cool‐season legume option for the south‐central United States. A 2‐yr field study at two locations in Louisiana was conducted to evaluate forage dry matter (DM) production and nutritive value of an oat ( Avena sativa L.)–field pea combination and an annual ryegrass ( Lolium multiflorum L.)–field pea combination at different field pea seeding rates. Monocultures of the grasses at a range of N fertilizer rates were included for comparison. Increasing seeding rates of field pea increased forage DM production linearly ( P < 0.05) and linearly ( P < 0.01) increased crude protein from forage of interseeded plantings. Interseeding field pea did not improve in vitro true digestibility of oat–field pea or annual ryegrass–field pea forage at either harvest, even though the annual grasses maintained a similar high digestibility to field pea only at the first harvest. Nitrogen fertilizer, which produced a linear increase in forage production with increasing N rate, provides more flexibility and easier management than the use of legumes. Cost of N will determine when the use of legumes such as field pea is a preferred option. The improved forage nutritive value of interseeded field pea can be a meaningful benefit with specific classes of livestock and production goals.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 9
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing field pea seeding rate increased forage dry matter production linearly.
- Taxon
- field peae0
- Treatment
- Increasing seeding rates of field peae0
- Outcome
- forage DM productione0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Increasing seeding rates of field pea increased forage DM production linearly ( P < 0.05)”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing field pea seeding rate increased crude protein linearly in interseeded forage.
- Taxon
- Field peat0
- Treatment
- Increasing seeding rates of field peae0
- Outcome
- crude proteine0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Increasing seeding rates of field pea increased forage DM production linearly ( P < 0.05) and linearly ( P < 0.01) increased crude protein from forage of interseeded plantings”
t0“Field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Interseeding field pea did not improve oat–field pea forage digestibility at either harvest.
- Taxon
- field peae0
- Treatment
- Interseeding field peae0
- Outcome
- in vitro true digestibility of oat–field peae0
- Direction
- did not improvee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Interseeding field pea did not improve in vitro true digestibility of oat–field pea or annual ryegrass–field pea forage at either harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Interseeding field pea did not improve annual ryegrass–field pea forage digestibility at either harvest.
- Taxon
- field peae0
- Treatment
- Interseeding field peae0
- Outcome
- annual ryegrass–field pea foragee0
- Direction
- did not improvee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Interseeding field pea did not improve in vitro true digestibility of oat–field pea or annual ryegrass–field pea forage at either harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Annual grasses had digestibility similar to field pea only at the first harvest.
Verbatim
e0“the annual grasses maintained a similar high digestibility to field pea only at the first harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing nitrogen fertilizer rate increased forage production linearly.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Nitrogen fertilizer, which produced a linear increase in forage production with increasing N rate”
t0“Field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen fertilizer offered more flexible and easier management than legumes.
Verbatim
e0“Nitrogen fertilizer, which produced a linear increase in forage production with increasing N rate, provides more flexibility and easier management than the use of legumes”
t0“Field pea”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors state nitrogen cost determines when field pea legumes are preferred.
Verbatim
e0“Cost of N will determine when the use of legumes such as field pea is a preferred option”
Claim · model-written summary
Improved nutritive value of interseeded field pea may benefit specific livestock and production goals.
Verbatim
e0“The improved forage nutritive value of interseeded field pea can be a meaningful benefit with specific classes of livestock and production goals”
The same questions in other papers
density · quality: protein · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
density · growth · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →fertilization · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
215 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
236 papers more in this group
See all 240 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.