This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1
PROCEDURES...................................................................................................................................... 1
RESULTS ............................................................................................................................................... 1
HUTCHINSON
Forage Production
Table 1................................................................................. 2
Forage Quality
Table 2................................................................................. 3
Forage Production
Table 3................................................................................. 4
Forage Quality
Table 4................................................................................. 5
HAYS
COLBY IRRIGATED
Forage Production
Table 5................................................................................. 6
Forage Quality
Table 6................................................................................. 8
MULTI-LOCATION AVERAGES
Forage Production
Table 7............................................................................... 10
Forage Quality
Table 8............................................................................... 10
ENTRANTS AND ENTRIES
Table 9............................................................................... 11
Contribution No. 06-207-S from the Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station.
-i-
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
INTRODUCTION
Kansas is a top producer of meat and animal products. An
important input for the beef and dairy industries is the
fodder or roughage that forms a key element in ruminant
diets. In 2005, Kansas farms produced 3.2 million tons of
corn and sorghum silage (January 12, 2006 Crops Report,
Kansas Agricultural Statistics Service).
Additional
roughage was obtained from other summer annual forages
such as sorghum-sudan, sudan, and millet. This publication
presents the results of tests designed to compare forage
production and quality of corn, sorghum, and sorghumsudan hybrids under typical Kansas growing conditions.
PROCEDURES
Crop performance tests in Kansas are a cooperative effort of
K-State Research and Extension and the private seed
industry. Entry fees from private seed companies help
finance the tests. Seed companies receive test
announcements and entry forms in late January; deadlines
for receipt of completed entry forms and seed are in early
March. Because entry selection and location are voluntary,
not all hybrids grown in the state are included in tests, and
hybrids are not grown uniformly at all test locations.
Near infrared reflectance (NIR) technology was used to
predict forage quality parameters. Calibration equations
were based on a subset of samples from the current year that
were analyzed with wet chemistry.
The calibration
equations fit the data quite well, with R2 of 0.99, 0.97, 0.95,
and 0.92 for CP, NDF, ADF, and ADL, respectively.
Although not all of the crude protein in a forage is available
to the animal as true protein, a forage with more crude
protein generally requires less supplemental protein in the
ration. Neutral detergent fiber (NDF) estimates total fiber
consisting of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin, and is
often related to intake. Forages with lesser NDF values are
desirable because the animal can consume more of the
forage, requiring fewer ration supplements. Acid detergent
fiber (ADF) estimates total cellulose, lignin, and pectin, and
often is used to predict the energy content of forage.
Forages with lesser ADF values are desirable because of
their greater energy content and higher digestibility. Acid
detergent lignin (ADL) estimates the lignin fraction, an
indigestible fiber with no nutritive value. Lesser ADL
values are associated with greater forage digestibility.
RESULTS
Seed companies were offered the opportunity to participate
in summer annual forage tests at four locations in 2005:
Parsons, Hutchinson, Hays, and Colby. Six companies
entered a total of 9 forage sorghum hybrids and 11 hay types
(sorghum-sudan hybrids, sudan, or millet). The test at
Parsons was dropped because of poor stands.
Individual test results are presented in Tables 1 to 6.
Average values for hybrids in all 3 tests grown in 2005 are
listed in Tables 7 and 8. Hybrid rankings often followed
similar trends when grown in more than one location or in
more than one year. Some hybrids, however, were more
consistent than others or were better adapted to either
dryland or irrigated conditions.
Three plots (replications) of each hybrid were grown at each
location in a randomized complete-block design. Each
forage sorghum plot consisted of four rows trimmed to a
length of 20 to 30 feet, depending on location. Forage and
grain yield estimates and samples for moisture and quality
analysis were obtained from the center two rows. Hay-type
entries were planted in narrow rows at high populations.
Species yield differences depended on test location. At
Hutchinson, the hay types out yielded the forage sorghums
on average. Second-cutting yields were much lower than
those for the first cutting at Hays and Colby, but only
slightly lower at Hutchinson. Forage sorghums out yielded
the hay types at Hays and Colby. In general, yields were
less than those for last year.
Each species was harvested as close as possible to the stage
of maturity that would optimize yield and quality of forage −
forage sorghum hybrids at mid-dough and sorghum-sudan
hybrids at boot stage. The hay-type hybrids were harvested
twice (Cut 1 and Cut 2).
As in past years, forage sorghum hybrids tended to have less
crude protein than the hay types had. The various fiber
components (NDF, ADF, ADL) showed inconsistent species
patterns. At Hutchinson, the hay types had fiber and lignin
equal to or less than what the forage sorghums had. At Hays
and Colby, the forage sorghums generally had less fiber on
average than the hay types had, although average lignin
content was similar. Individual hybrids from either species
differed from the species averages for most quality
characteristics. Harvest management and hybrid selection
both play an important role in obtaining high yields of
quality forage.
Samples from each harvest were collected to determine
moisture content and for laboratory analysis of forage
quality: crude protein (CP), neutral detergent fiber (NDF),
acid detergent fiber (ADF), and acid detergent lignin (ADL).
Crude protein was calculated by multiplying the nitrogen
content by 6.25, the average proportion of elemental
nitrogen to plant protein.
-1-
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Table 1. Hutchinson Summer Annual Forage Test, 2005.
Forage
Grain Days
yield to
Cut 2 Cut 1 Cut 2 (bu/a) blm
Yield (pounds DM/acre) Moist. (%)
BRAND
NAME
FORAGE SORGHUM
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DEKALB
FS-5
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
DEKALB
DKS59-09
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
HAY TYPES**
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
BUFFALO
GRAZEX BMR718 (SS)
BUFFALO
GRAZEX BMR727 (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
GOLDEN HARVEST RE-GRO H-22B (SS)
BUFFALO
GRAZEX BMR719 (SS)
GOLDEN HARVEST RE GRO EX34 (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS TRUDAN HEADLESS (SU)
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
Total
Cut 1
11,319
7,130
6,653
6,211
6,077
4,959
7,058
15
1,907
----------
----------
58
68
67
67
60
71
65
4
5
----------
38
18
12
16
12
10
18
21
7
9,208
9,111
8,822
8,629
8,586
8,370
7,923
7,864
7,748
8,473
8
1,216
4,395
5,023
5,072
5,135
5,036
4,035
4,816
4,559
3,929
4,667
10
828
4,813
4,088
3,750
3,494
3,550
4,334
3,107
3,306
3,820
3,807
18
1,168
80
79
81
81
82
82
82
81
84
81
2
3
79
81
84
83
86
83
85
83
84
83
3
4
-------------
Pop.
Ht. Lodg (1000
(in) (%) ppa)
85
59
65
71
65
70
64
61
89 119
63
64
72
74
8
5
11
6
Ht1 Ht2
55
62
63
62
55
54
60
58
53
51
58
58
55
55
53
53
49
53
56
56
5
5
5
5
0
2
3
5
63
23
16
47
14
79
68
70
89
68
67
88 126
73
88
68
79
74
89
Ht1 Ht2
66
64
55
54
59
60
63
63
53
56
50
1
33
33
2
23
25
77
82
101 120
79
62
87
87
67
73
83
84
Ht1 Ht2
56
65
46
58
54
62
1
33
33
2
23
25
-------------
22.5
20.1
21.9
23.8
25.4
22.7
22.7
0.0
NS
(%)
-------------
2 - Year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DEKALB
FS-5
DEKALB
DKS59-09
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
BUFFALO
GRAZEX BMR727 (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
SORG. PARTNERS TRUDAN HEADLESS (SU)
10,445
9,148
7,407
7,332
6,705
6,200
7,767
--------
--------
50
66
59
62
68
69
64
--------
74
53
64
43
49
41
52
12,433
12,009
11,391
11,351
11,041
6,053
5,802
5,588
5,191
5,139
6,380
6,208
5,803
6,160
5,902
79
82
81
79
83
76
82
79
70
81
------
------
22.5
20.1
23.8
25.4
21.9
22.7
22.7
(%)
------
3 - Year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
DEKALB
FS-5
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
8,991
7,533
7,069
6,733
5,568
7,639
-------
-------
63
61
60
66
66
63
-------
39
30
46
35
30
37
11,503
11,223
9,538
4,873
4,533
3,981
6,630
6,690
5,557
76
78
77
68
77
64
----
* Unless two varieties differ by more than the LSD, little confidence can be placed in one being superior to the other.
** SS = Sorghum-sudan hybrid, SU = Sudan.
-2-
3
5
10
20.1
25.4
23.8
21.9
22.7
22.7
(%)
91.7
81.7
80.0
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Table 2. Hutchinson Summer Annual Forage Test - Forage Quality, 2005.
Forage Quality (dry matter basis)
Protein (%)
BRAND
NAME
FORAGE SORGHUM
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
DEKALB
FS-5
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
DEKALB
DKS59-09
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
HAY TYPES**
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
BUFFALO
GRAZEX BMR727 (SS)
BUFFALO
GRAZEX BMR719 (SS)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
BUFFALO
GRAZEX BMR718 (SS)
GOLDEN HARVEST RE-GRO H-22B (SS)
GOLDEN HARVEST RE GRO EX34 (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS TRUDAN HEADLESS (SU)
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
Cut 1
Cut 2
NDF (%)
Cut 1
ADF (%)
Cut 2
Cut 1
ADL (%)
Cut 2
Cut 1
Cut 2
8.4
7.2
7.2
6.1
5.4
5.1
6.6
9.3
1.6
----------
55.0
59.9
61.0
60.3
59.6
60.1
59.3
3.4
NS
----------
33.0
36.2
37.2
37.5
36.7
38.5
36.5
4.4
NS
----------
5.9
7.4
7.4
6.2
7.4
6.5
6.8
3.7
0.6
----------
17.6
16.5
16.4
16.2
16.1
16.0
15.3
15.3
14.4
16.0
9.5
NS
14.7
17.6
16.1
13.3
15.1
15.0
15.8
13.7
18.0
15.5
11.7
NS
58.4
59.1
57.8
58.4
59.8
58.6
61.0
59.2
61.7
59.3
2.3
NS
63.0
63.0
62.3
62.6
64.2
63.1
64.3
63.1
61.4
63.0
1.6
NS
33.4
35.0
31.8
34.0
34.0
33.1
36.2
34.7
38.5
34.5
5.5
NS
39.2
37.5
37.7
39.0
39.1
39.3
40.0
39.2
37.4
38.7
4.1
NS
5.8
5.8
5.2
5.1
5.7
5.1
6.4
5.3
6.3
5.7
5.4
0.7
6.6
7.4
6.4
6.2
7.3
6.2
7.3
6.3
6.9
6.7
4.5
0.7
2-year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
DEKALB
FS-5
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
BUFFALO
GRAZEX BMR727 (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS TRUDAN HEADLESS (SU)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
7.7
6.5
6.3
6.2
5.8
5.4
6.2
--------
57.1
60.0
62.6
59.3
63.2
65.1
61.0
--------
35.5
38.2
41.6
37.5
42.0
43.2
39.3
--------
7.2
7.7
8.2
7.5
8.7
8.1
7.6
--------
17.4
15.8
15.8
15.7
15.7
13.6
13.5
14.6
13.1
12.9
58.0
58.0
59.3
59.7
60.2
61.7
61.5
61.6
62.3
65.0
33.7
33.2
35.5
34.9
36.1
36.8
36.1
37.5
36.6
39.7
6.0
5.1
6.2
5.9
6.2
5.9
5.7
6.7
6.7
7.6
3-year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
DEKALB
FS-5
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
7.8
7.0
6.9
6.6
5.5
6.7
-------
57.6
61.1
62.2
59.1
63.3
61.0
-------
35.1
37.4
39.9
36.4
40.4
38.0
-------
6.8
7.2
7.8
7.0
7.4
7.1
-------
16.4
14.9
14.9
13.3
12.9
12.7
57.6
59.3
59.2
62.9
65.8
63.7
31.8
33.7
33.0
36.7
39.1
36.7
5.4
5.5
5.3
5.8
7.2
6.5
* Unless two varieties differ by more than the LSD, little confidence can be placed in one being superior to the other.
** SS = Sorghum-sudan hybrid, SU = Sudan.
-3-
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Table 3. Hays Summer Annual Forage Test, 2005.
Forage
Grain Days
yield to
Cut 2 Cut 1 Cut 2 (bu/a) blm
Yield (pounds DM/acre) Moist. (%)
BRAND
NAME
FORAGE SORGHUM
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
SORG. PARTNERS HIKANE II
DEKALB
FS-5
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
HAY TYPES**
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN 79 (SS)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
Total
Cut 1
11,776
10,558
9,483
9,400
8,829
7,678
6,803
9,218
9
1,500
-----------
9,392
8,667
7,368
8,476
9
1,722
7,809
7,124
5,622
6,852
8
1,234
----------1,604
1,718
1,676
1,666
21
NS
63
72
66
64
63
65
69
66
3
4
-----------
37
5
27
28
28
18
10
22
25
10
80
76
73
76
1
2
77
77
75
76
1
2
-------
Pop.
Ht. Lodg (1000
(in) (%) ppa)
96
-61
80
78
88
71
79
3
4
Ht1
61
69
69
66
8
12
49
94
64
59
43
72
57
63
7
7
Ht2
27
31
38
32
24
17
-----------
88
86
83
68
79
88
74
80
Ht1
62
72
73
66
96
56
78
75
54
85
67
74
Ht2
38
41
50
39
3
43
0
0
30
0
40
22
111
100
97
91
106
91
96
Ht1
55
63
64
57
85
53
70
51
75
62
66
Ht2
34
39
43
36
20
22
5
32
17
32
28
-------
51.3
38.4
42.5
54.0
56.5
25.3
24.3
41.7
0.0
5.6
(%)
-------
2 - Year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DEKALB
FS-5
SORG. PARTNERS HIKANE II
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN 79 (SS)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
AVERAGES
11,965
11,961
11,740
10,944
10,520
10,190
8,644
10,685
---------
---------
70
61
66
68
64
69
70
67
---------
19
68
46
40
67
30
24
40
9,420
8,702
7,681
8,639
7,052
6,248
5,054
6,235
2,378
2,541
2,592
2,425
81
78
74
79
73
73
70
72
-----
-----
38.4
51.3
54.0
42.5
56.5
25.3
24.3
41.7
(%)
-----
3 - Year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DEKALB
FS-5
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN 79 (SS)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
AVERAGES
10,665
10,462
10,338
8,925
8,860
7,683
9,218
--------
--------
71
64
67
66
70
70
68
--------
19
68
46
67
30
24
40
9,996
9,667
7,285
8,904
7,159
6,438
4,936
6,187
2,844
3,287
2,325
2,732
75
72
67
72
75
72
71
73
-----
* Unless two varieties differ by more than the LSD, little confidence can be placed in one being superior to the other.
** SS = Sorghum-sudan hybrid, SU = Sudan.
-4-
13
0
33
9
38.4
51.3
54.0
56.5
25.3
24.3
41.7
(%)
-----
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Table 4. Hays Summer Annual Forage Test - Forage Quality, 2005.
Forage Quality (dry matter basis)
Protein (%)
BRAND
NAME
FORAGE SORGHUM
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DEKALB
FS-5
DEKALB
DKS59-09
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
SORG. PARTNERS HIKANE II
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
HAY TYPES**
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN 79 (SS)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
Cut 1
Cut 2
NDF (%)
Cut 1
ADF (%)
Cut 2
Cut 1
ADL (%)
Cut 2
Cut 1
Cut 2
7.9
7.5
7.0
6.8
6.3
6.0
5.7
6.7
9.0
1.5
-----------
51.6
54.6
55.2
53.8
59.9
55.5
52.7
54.8
4.4
NS
-----------
30.2
32.5
33.2
32.1
37.9
33.7
32.3
33.1
4.7
3.8
-----------
6.0
7.1
7.2
6.5
6.6
6.8
6.6
6.7
6.9
NS
-----------
10.4
10.2
9.4
10.0
5.1
NS
10.9
12.2
11.1
11.4
2.8
1.4
62.2
63.7
66.3
64.1
2.1
NS
58.3
58.8
59.9
59.0
0.4
1.1
38.0
38.1
41.1
39.0
3.4
NS
33.3
33.1
35.4
33.9
2.8
NS
7.1
7.5
8.6
7.7
7.3
NS
6.6
6.4
7.3
6.8
3.9
NS
2-year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
DEKALB
FS-5
SORG. PARTNERS HIKANE II
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN 79 (SS)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
AVERAGES
7.5
7.1
6.7
6.6
6.3
6.0
5.9
6.5
---------
52.9
51.2
54.8
51.6
60.3
57.3
51.2
55.0
---------
33.0
32.4
33.6
31.6
39.0
36.2
32.4
34.5
---------
7.5
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.8
7.9
7.1
7.2
---------
10.9
10.8
9.8
10.7
8.8
8.7
7.8
8.8
61.9
62.9
64.6
62.8
60.0
60.8
63.3
60.1
39.7
39.9
40.9
40.4
35.2
35.8
38.7
35.8
7.6
8.1
8.7
7.9
6.6
6.5
7.2
6.6
3-year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
DEKALB
DKS59-09
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
SORG. PARTNERS SS 405
DEKALB
FS-5
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN 79 (SS)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
AVERAGES
8.3
8.2
7.3
7.0
7.0
6.5
7.3
--------
52.8
55.4
53.2
55.6
59.7
57.4
55.9
--------
32.3
33.6
32.1
33.7
37.3
35.1
34.2
--------
6.9
7.3
7.1
7.1
7.5
7.4
7.1
--------
10.6
10.3
9.5
10.5
9.5
9.6
9.0
9.8
60.7
61.3
62.5
61.2
60.0
60.4
62.1
59.9
37.6
37.5
38.2
37.7
36.3
36.1
38.2
36.5
7.3
7.6
8.1
7.4
7.2
7.1
7.7
7.3
* Unless two varieties differ by more than the LSD, little confidence can be placed in one being superior to the other.
** SS = Sorghum-sudan hybrid, SU = Sudan.
-5-
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Table 5. Colby Irrigated Summer Annual Forage Test, 2005.
Forage
Grain Days
yield to
Cut 2 Cut 1 Cut 2 (bu/a) blm
Yield (pounds DM/acre) Moist. (%)
BRAND
NAME
FORAGE SORGHUM
SORG. PARTNERS HIKANE II
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DEKALB
FS-5
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS DIVIDEND BMR
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
MOSS SEED
4EVER GREEN
MOSS SEED
MILLENIUM BMR
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
HAY TYPES**
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS BONUS-R BMR (SS)
GOLDEN HARVEST RE-GRO H-22B (SS)
GOLDEN HARVEST RE GRO EX34 (SS)
MOSS SEED
SU-2-LM (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS TRUDAN HEADLESS (SU)
MOSS SEED
MEGA GREEN (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
Total
Cut 1
16,854
16,361
13,924
13,221
12,908
12,298
12,112
11,782
10,595
13,339
9
2,010
-------------
-------------
67
72
73
74
71
74
70
80
73
73
3
4
-------------
52
28
30
48
34
24
52
-33
38
37
24
16,094
14,921
14,282
12,471
12,374
12,172
11,008
10,138
9,858
12,591
12
2,656
13,492
12,715
11,431
10,631
10,169
9,340
9,382
8,125
7,945
10,359
13
2,244
2,601
2,205
2,850
1,840
2,204
2,832
1,626
2,013
1,914
2,232
18
711
67
79
74
74
75
79
79
83
67
75
2
3
34
41
40
28
32
25
36
37
32
34
13
7
-------------
69
81
78
76
71
77
74
-79
76
2
2
Ht1
103
99
99
97
103
96
103
94
97
99
5
-1
Pop.
Ht. Lodg (1000
(in) (%) ppa)
89
66
91
68
83
81
94
94
92
84
8
12
Ht2
29
27
32
26
26
22
21
22
23
25
19
NS
-------------
76 100
83 101
75
72
80
87
80
72
82 102
77
92
79
92
Ht1 Ht2
106
38
100
37
95
34
94
28
99
35
93
29
98
33
12
3
7
77
28
8
5
23
-------------
73.9
60.7
72.7
57.1
45.2
68.2
56.9
56.6
49.4
60.1
0.0
14.1
(%)
-------------
2 - Year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
SORG. PARTNERS HIKANE II
DEKALB
FS-5
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS DIVIDEND BMR
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
GOLDEN HARVEST RE-GRO H-22B (SS)
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS BONUS-R BMR (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS TRUDAN HEADLESS (SU)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
AVERAGES
17,592
17,231
16,858
15,346
15,313
15,255
13,982
15,250
---------
---------
67
70
68
72
72
69
72
71
---------
61
51
64
51
75
49
45
59
15,878 12,310
14,478 10,791
14,427 11,078
13,368 9,938
11,915 7,877
11,321 8,392
13,210 9,996
3,568
3,687
3,348
3,430
4,038
2,929
3,213
70
74
80
78
69
82
76
50
54
55
48
47
54
51
--------
-6-
--------
73.9
72.7
60.7
68.2
57.1
56.9
45.2
60.1
(%)
--------
(continued)
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Table 5. Colby Irrigated Summer Annual Forage Test, 2005 (continued).
Forage
Grain Days
yield to
Cut 2 Cut 1 Cut 2 (bu/a) blm
Yield (pounds DM/acre) Moist. (%)
BRAND
NAME
Total
Cut 1
Pop.
Ht. Lodg (1000
(in) (%) ppa)
3 - Year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
DEKALB
FS-5
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS DIVIDEND BMR
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS BONUS-R BMR (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
AVERAGES
16,522
16,412
14,624
14,450
13,923
13,533
14,587
--------
--------
68
66
71
70
69
71
70
--------
49
56
40
70
43
43
48
14,524 11,110
13,801 10,852
11,358 7,820
11,349 8,506
12,498 9,513
3,414
2,949
3,538
2,843
2,985
70
79
68
81
75
47
47
44
47
45
------
83
99
77
70
82
88
78
72
82 100
77
93
80
91
Ht1 Ht2
104
30
89
27
99
28
87
24
94
26
* Unless two varieties differ by more than the LSD, little confidence can be placed in one being superior to the other.
** SS = Sorghum-sudan hybrid, SU = Sudan.
-7-
2
3
67
19
4
8
18
0
0
0
0
3
68.7
57.6
63.7
63.8
44.5
48.7
56.6
(%)
------
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Table 6. Colby Irrigated Summer Annual Forage Test - Forage Quality, 2005.
Forage Quality (dry matter basis)
Protein (%)
BRAND
NAME
FORAGE SORGHUM
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
MOSS SEED
4EVER GREEN
DEKALB
FS-5
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS DIVIDEND BMR
SORG. PARTNERS HIKANE II
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
MOSS SEED
MILLENIUM BMR
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
HAY TYPES**
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS BONUS-R BMR (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
MOSS SEED
MEGA GREEN (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS TRUDAN HEADLESS (SU)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
MOSS SEED
SU-2-LM (SS)
GOLDEN HARVEST RE-GRO H-22B (SS)
GOLDEN HARVEST RE GRO EX34 (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
AVERAGES
CV(%)
LSD(0.05)*
Cut 1
Cut 2
NDF (%)
Cut 1
ADF (%)
Cut 2
Cut 1
ADL (%)
Cut 2
Cut 1
Cut 2
6.9
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.4
6.4
5.8
5.6
5.5
5.9
6.2
NS
-------------
58.8
65.0
56.0
55.2
60.5
53.9
58.9
52.3
55.9
54.1
57.1
1.8
-------------
35.9
40.8
35.5
34.7
37.5
34.4
37.3
32.9
35.9
33.1
35.8
1.9
-------------
10.1
8.9
9.0
8.7
8.7
9.5
9.0
9.9
7.8
9.4
9.1
NS
-------------
9.8
8.5
8.1
8.0
7.7
7.7
7.6
7.4
6.4
7.9
8.8
1.6
9.2
10.2
10.4
9.9
9.7
10.6
9.7
11.1
9.8
10.1
11.1
NS
61.8
66.4
67.1
66.3
63.1
63.7
61.1
62.5
66.6
64.3
2.7
4.0
62.6
62.8
61.9
62.5
62.6
62.4
62.8
60.7
62.0
62.3
2.9
NS
39.7
43.2
44.4
44.4
39.7
41.6
40.3
40.2
43.7
41.9
4.0
3.8
38.7
37.1
36.7
37.4
37.4
36.8
38.1
36.3
37.3
37.3
5.7
NS
8.5
9.0
9.2
9.5
9.7
9.5
9.2
8.6
10.6
9.3
5.8
1.3
8.3
8.2
8.2
9.0
9.1
8.2
8.3
7.1
8.1
8.3
12.4
NS
2-year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS DIVIDEND BMR
SORG. PARTNERS HIKANE II
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DEKALB
FS-5
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS BONUS-R BMR (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
GOLDEN HARVEST RE-GRO H-22B (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS TRUDAN HEADLESS (SU)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
AVERAGES
7.0
6.6
6.5
6.3
6.2
5.9
5.4
6.0
---------
49.4
49.6
50.2
52.0
49.6
50.4
48.0
49.4
---------
31.3
31.5
31.3
33.5
31.9
32.7
30.7
31.3
---------
7.0
7.2
8.3
8.2
7.8
7.5
8.1
7.8
---------
8.9
7.4
6.7
6.6
6.5
6.2
7.2
--------
62.3
66.4
60.1
64.8
65.7
64.7
63.4
--------
40.7
44.5
39.9
44.0
44.2
42.6
42.0
--------
9.0
9.1
9.4
9.6
10.8
10.2
9.3
--------
-8-
(continued)
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Table 6. Colby Irrigated Summer Annual Forage Test - Forage Quality, 2005 (continued).
Forage Quality (dry matter basis)
Protein (%)
BRAND
NAME
Cut 1
Cut 2
NDF (%)
Cut 1
ADF (%)
Cut 2
Cut 1
ADL (%)
Cut 2
Cut 1
Cut 2
3-year Averages
FORAGE SORGHUM
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS DIVIDEND BMR
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DEKALB
FS-5
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES**
DRUSSEL SEED
DSS BONUS-R BMR (SS)
SORG. PARTNERS SORDAN HEADLESS (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
AVERAGES
7.1
6.6
6.2
6.1
6.0
5.4
6.2
--------
51.5
53.3
53.1
51.0
53.0
49.6
51.7
--------
33.1
34.2
34.4
32.8
35.0
32.3
33.1
--------
7.6
8.8
8.3
7.8
8.2
8.5
8.2
--------
9.3
8.3
7.1
6.9
8.0
------
61.6
64.9
64.4
63.4
62.4
------
40.0
43.1
42.3
40.7
40.7
------
9.2
8.9
10.0
9.2
8.9
------
* Unless two varieties differ by more than the LSD, little confidence can be placed in one being superior to the other.
** SS = Sorghum-sudan hybrid, SU = Sudan.
-9-
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Table 7. 2005 Summer Annual Forages, Multi-location Averages.
Forage
Grain Days
yield to
(bu/a)
blm
Cut 2 Cut 1 Cut 2
Yield (pounds DM/acre) Moist. (%)
BRAND
NAME
FORAGE SORGHUM
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
DEKALB
FS-5
DEKALB
DKS59-09
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES*
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
Total
Cut 1
13,152
10,151
9,420
8,814
8,223
9,872
-------
-------
65
68
68
68
71
68
-------
34
25
31
27
18
26
11,290
8,811
8,546
5,987
2,802
2,801
74
73
64
62
---
Ht. Lodg Stnd
(in) (%) (%)
87
58
74
74
73
57
76
79
68
68
76
74
Ht1 Ht2
78
41
74
41
0
2
5
3
23
16
-------
---
---
Table 8. 2005 Summer Annual Forages, Multi-location Averages.
Forage Quality (dry matter basis)
Protein (%)
BRAND
NAME
FORAGE SORGHUM
MATURITY CHECK EARLY SUMAC
DEKALB
FS-5
SORG. PARTNERS NK 300
MATURITY CHECK ATLAS
DEKALB
DKS59-09
AVERAGES
HAY TYPES*
MATURITY CHECK NB280S (SS)
MATURITY CHECK PIPER (SU)
Cut 1
Cut 2
NDF (%)
Cut 1
ADF (%)
Cut 2
Cut 1
ADL (%)
Cut 2
Cut 1
Cut 2
7.3
6.9
6.6
6.5
6.2
6.4
-------
53.0
57.0
57.7
56.8
57.7
56.1
-------
32.0
35.0
35.0
35.1
35.6
34.2
-------
7.3
7.9
8.2
7.9
7.2
7.6
-------
11.3
10.8
12.3
12.8
62.2
64.0
61.9
61.6
37.3
39.9
36.5
36.7
7.6
8.3
7.6
7.6
* SS = Sorghum-sudan hybrid, SU = Sudan.
- 10 -
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Table 9. Entrants in the 2005 Kansas Summer Annual Forage Performance Tests.
Brand/Company/Address
Crop - Hybrid
Brand/Company/Address
Crop - Hybrid
Traits* Maturity**
BUFFALO
MOSS SEED
Sharp Bros. Seed Company
Box 140
Healy, KS 67850
800-462-8483
sharpseed.com
Walter Moss Seed Co.
P.O. Box 21114
Waco, TX 76702-1114
254-840-4774
SS - GRAZEX BMR718
SS - GRAZEX BMR719
SS - GRAZEX BMR727
BMR
BMR
BMR
FS - 4EVER GREEN
FS - 4EVER GREEN BMR
FS - MILLENIUM BMR
SS - MEGA GREEN
SS - SU-2-LM
ME
ME
ME
Traits* Maturity**
PS
BMR
BMR
PS
LM
PS
PS
L
M
L
-------
M
M
L
M
PS
PS
DEKALB
Monsanto Seed
7159 N. 247th West
P.O. Box 7
Mount Hope, KS 67108
316-445-2290
monsanto.com
FS - DKS59-09
FS - FS-5
SORG. PARTNERS
Sorghum Partners, Inc.
Box 189, 403 S. Monroe
New Deal, TX 79350
806-746-5566
sorghum-partners.com
---
M
M
BMR
BMR
ML
PS
BMR
--
ME
ME
FS - HIKANE II
FS - NK 300
FS - SS 405
SS - SORDAN 79
SS - SORDAN HEADLESS
SU - TRUDAN HEADLESS
DRUSSEL SEED
Drussel Seed, Inc.
2197 West Parallel Rd.
Garden City, KS 67846
620-275-2359
FS - DSS DIVIDEND BMR
SS - DSS BONUS-R BMR
GOLDEN HARVEST
J.C. Robinson Seed Co.
100 JC Robinson Blvd.
PO Box A
Waterloo, NE 68069
800-944-7333
goldenharvestseeds.com
SS - RE GRO EX34
SS - RE-GRO H-22B
* BMR = brown mid-rib, PS = photoperiod sensitive
** E = early, M = medium, L = late, PS = photoperiod sensitive
- 11 -
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
Results from Kansas Crop Performance Tests belong to the University and the public and shall be controlled by
the University so as to produce the greatest benefit to the public. Performance data may be used in the following
ways: 1) Tables may be reproduced in their entirety provided the source is referenced and data are not
manipulated or reinterpreted; 2) Advertising statements by an individual company about the performance of its
entries may be made as long as they are accurate statements about the data as published, with no reference to
other companies' names or cultivars. In both cases, the following must be included with the reprint or ad citing
the appropriate publication number and title: "See the official Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment
Station and Cooperative Extension Service Report of Progress 955 '2005 Kansas Performance Tests with Summer
Annual Forages', or the Kansas Crop Performance Test website, http://www.ksu.edu/kscpt, for details.
Endorsement or recommendation by Kansas State University is not implied."
These materials may be freely reproduced for educational purposes. All other rights reserved. In each case, give
credit to the author(s), name of work, Kansas State University, and the date the work was published.
The information contained in this publication is available for viewing or downloading at
http://www.ksu.edu/kscpt.
CONTRIBUTORS
MAIN STATION - MANHATTAN
Kraig Roozeboom, Agronomist
EXPERIMENT FIELDS
Bill Heer - Hutchinson
RESEARCH CENTERS
Patrick Evans - Colby
Kenneth Kofoid - Hays
Keith Harmoney - Hays
NOTE: Trade names are used to identify products. No endorsement is
intended, nor is any criticism implied of similar products not named.
This publication from the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service
has been archived. Current information is available from http://www.ksre.ksu.edu.
For those interested in accessing crop performance testing information electronically, visit our World Wide Web site.
All of the information contained in this publication, plus more, is available for viewing or downloading.
The URL is www.ksu.edu/kscpt.
Excerpts from the
University Research Policy Agreement with Cooperating Seed Companies*
Permission is hereby given to Kansas State University to test varieties and/or hybrids designated on the attached
entry forms in the manner indicated in the test announcements. I certify that seed submitted for testing is a true
sample of the seed being offered for sale.
I understand that all results from Kansas Crop Performance Tests belong to the University and the public and shall
be controlled by the University so as to produce the greatest benefit to the public. Performance data may be used
in the following ways: 1) Tables may be reproduced in their entirety provided the source is referenced and data are
not manipulated or reinterpreted; 2) Advertising statements by an individual company about the performance of its
entries may be made as long as they are accurate statements about the data as published, with no reference to other
companies’ names or cultivars. In both cases, the following must be included with the reprint or ad citing the appropriate publication number and title: “See the official Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and
Cooperative Extension Service Report of Progress 955 ‘2005 Kansas Performance Tests with Summer Annual Forages,’
or the Kansas Crop Performance Test Web site, www.ksu.edu/kscpt, for details. Endorsement or recommendation by
Kansas State University is not implied.”
These materials may be freely reproduced for educational purposes. All other rights reserved. In each case, give credit to
the author(s), name of work, Kansas State University, and the date the work was published.
Contributors
Main Station, Manhattan
Kraig Roozeboom, Agronomist
Experiment Fields
William Heer, Hutchinson
Research Centers
Patrick Evans, Colby
Ken Kofoid, Hays
Keith Harmoney, Hays
NOTE: Trade names are used to identify products.
No endorsement is intended, nor is any criticism implied of similar products not named.
This Report of Progress was edited, designed, and printed
by the Department of Communications at Kansas State University
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service, Manhattan 66506
SRP 955
February 2006
Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service is an equal opportunity provider and
employer. These materials may be available in alternative formats.
1900