Abstract
Two challenges facing dairy producers are low profit and environmental issues related to nutrient management.Wholefarm simulation was used to determine if adding small grain crops to traditional corn and alfalfa rotations providedlongterm environmental and economic benefits. Small grain cropping strategies included 1) corn double cropped with barleyharvested as cash crop grain and straw bedding, 2) corn double cropped with barley harvested as feed grain and straw, 3) corndouble cropped with barley harvested as silage, 4) corn double cropped with rye harvested as silage, and 5) corn replacedwith cash crop wheat and straw bedding. Nitrogen leaching loss over the farm was reduced by 10 kg/ha (8.9 lb/acre) when40% of the corn was double cropped with a small grain, and soil P accumulation was reduced by 2 kg/ha (1.8 lb/acre) peryear. Annual farm net return or profit was increased by up to $93/cow when doublecropped barley or singlecropped wheatwas harvested as grain and straw, by about $30/cow for doublecropped barley silage, and $50/cow for doublecropped ryesilage. Use of small grains generally reduced the risk or yeartoyear variation in net return. The economic benefit of usingsmall grains was not sensitive to farm size, herd milk production level, the amount of forage used in animal rations, or grainprices, but there was less benefit when the farm was moved to a more northern climate. If straw was not harvested and usedfor bedding, the economic benefit for producing grain as a cash crop or feed was eliminated. Use of small grain crops onPennsylvania dairy farms should be encouraged, particularly when double cropped with corn, to reduce N leaching loss,reduce soil P accumulation, and improve farm profit.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Double cropping 40% of corn with a small grain reduced nitrogen leaching loss by 10 kg/ha.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse1 - Treatment
- 40% of the corn was double cropped with a small graine1
- Outcome
- Nitrogen leaching loss over the farme1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 10 kg/ha (8.9 lb/acre)e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Nitrogen leaching loss over the farm was reduced by 10 kg/ha (8.9 lb/acre) when 40% of the corn was double cropped with a small grain, and soil P accumulation was reduced by 2 kg/ha (1.8 lb/acre) peryear”
Claim · model-written summary
Double cropping 40% of corn with a small grain reduced soil P accumulation by 2 kg/ha per year.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- 40% of the corn was double cropped with a small graine1
- Outcome
- soil P accumulatione1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 2 kg/ha (1.8 lb/acre)e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Nitrogen leaching loss over the farm was reduced by 10 kg/ha (8.9 lb/acre) when 40% of the corn was double cropped with a small grain, and soil P accumulation was reduced by 2 kg/ha (1.8 lb/acre) peryear”
Claim · model-written summary
Double-cropped barley or single-cropped wheat harvested as grain and straw increased annual farm net return by up to $93/cow.
- Taxon
- barley
.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgaree2 - Treatment
- doublecropped barley or singlecropped wheatwas harvested as grain and strawe2
- Outcome
- Annual farm net return or profite2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Value
- $93/cowe2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e2“Annual farm net return or profit was increased by up to $93/cow when doublecropped barley or singlecropped wheatwas harvested as grain and straw, by about $30/cow for doublecropped barley silage, and $50/cow for doublecropped ryesilage”
Claim · model-written summary
Double-cropped barley silage increased annual farm net return by about $30/cow.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree2
- Treatment
- doublecropped barley silagee2
- Outcome
- Annual farm net return or profite2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Value
- $30/cowe2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Annual farm net return or profit was increased by up to $93/cow when doublecropped barley or singlecropped wheatwas harvested as grain and straw, by about $30/cow for doublecropped barley silage, and $50/cow for doublecropped ryesilage”
Claim · model-written summary
Double-cropped rye silage increased annual farm net return by $50/cow.
- Taxon
- rye
Secale cerealee2 - Treatment
- doublecropped ryesilagee2
- Outcome
- Annual farm net return or profite2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Value
- $50/cowe2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Annual farm net return or profit was increased by up to $93/cow when doublecropped barley or singlecropped wheatwas harvested as grain and straw, by about $30/cow for doublecropped barley silage, and $50/cow for doublecropped ryesilage”
Claim · model-written summary
Use of small grains reduced the risk and year-to-year variation in net return.
- Taxon
- small grainse3
- Treatment
- Use of small grainse3
- Outcome
- risk or yeartoyear variation in net returne3
- Direction
- reducede3
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e3“Use of small grains generally reduced the risk or yeartoyear variation in net return”
Claim · model-written summary
The economic benefit of using small grains was not sensitive to farm size, herd milk production, forage use, or grain prices.
- Taxon
- small grainse4
- Treatment
- using small grainse4
- Outcome
- economic benefite4
- Qualifier
- not sensitive to farm size, herd milk production level, the amount of forage used in animal rations, or grainpricese4
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e4“The economic benefit of usingsmall grains was not sensitive to farm size, herd milk production level, the amount of forage used in animal rations, or grainprices”
Claim · model-written summary
The economic benefit of small grains was lower on a farm moved to a more northern climate.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e4“The economic benefit of usingsmall grains was not sensitive to farm size, herd milk production level, the amount of forage used in animal rations, or grainprices”
e5“there was less benefit when the farm was moved to a more northern climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Without straw harvested for bedding, the economic benefit of growing grain as a cash crop or feed was eliminated.
- Taxon
- small grainse4
- Treatment
- straw was not harvested and used for beddinge6
- Outcome
- the economic benefit for producing grain as a cash crop or feede6
- Direction
- eliminatede6
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e4“The economic benefit of usingsmall grains was not sensitive to farm size, herd milk production level, the amount of forage used in animal rations, or grainprices”
e6“If straw was not harvested and usedfor bedding, the economic benefit for producing grain as a cash crop or feed was eliminated”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend encouraging small grain crops on Pennsylvania dairy farms, particularly double cropped with corn.
Verbatim
e7“Use of small grain crops onPennsylvania dairy farms should be encouraged, particularly when double cropped with corn, to reduce N leaching loss,reduce soil P accumulation, and improve farm profit”
The same questions in other papers
Zea mays subsp. mays · environment: emissions · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →Zea mays subsp. mays · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
33 papers more in this group
See all 37 papers →processing · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 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.