Reveals hybrid bromegrass-alfalfa pasture maximizes beef production and profit while annuals lower methane emissions in steers, highlighting trade-offs in grazing systems.
Objective This study compared annual and perennial forage systems for yield, quality, grazing animal perfor-mance, enteric emissions, and economic viability. Materials and Methods Four forage systems were evaluated, consisting of 2 annual systems: (1) BAR-PEA-BRAS: CDC Austenson barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.) + 4010 pea ( Pisum sativum L.) + Winfred forage brassica ( Brassica oleracea L. × Brassica rapa L.) + Gorilla forage brassica ( Brassica napus L.); (2) FALLRYE-CLOV: AC Hazlet fall rye ( Secale cereale L.) + Frosty berseem clover ( Trifolium alexandrinum L.); and 2 perennial systems: (3) HYBROME-ALF: AC Success hybrid bromegrass ( Bro-mus riparius Rehm. × Bromus inermis Leyss.) + PS3006 alfalfa ( Medicago sativa L.); (4) MBROME-SAIN: AC Armada meadow bromegrass ( Bromus riparius Rehm.) + AAC Mountainview sainfoin ( Onobrychis viciifolia Scop.). In the 5-yr study (2019–2023), crossbred Bos taurus steers (n = 156; initial BW = 388 ± 9 kg) were randomly al-located to 1 of 4 replicated (n = 3) forage systems for an average grazing period of 54 d. Results and Discussion The BAR-PEA-BRAS and HYBROME-ALF systems had the greatest DM yield, whereas MBROME-SAIN and FALLRYE-CLOV yields were lower but not different from each other. Annual for-ages had greater TDN and digestibility of CP and NDF but lower NDF content than perennial forages. Steers grazing FALLRYE-CLOV had the greatest DMI compared with other systems. Total beef production was greatest for the HYBROME-ALF system (124 kg/ha). Steers grazing annual forages had lower enteric CH 4 (g/kg DMI and g/ kg ADG) relative to steers grazing perennial forages. The HYBROME-ALF system had greatest revenue and profit-ability of the 3 valuation methods. Implications and Applications The hybrid brome-grass and alfalfa mixture showed the highest forage pro-ductivity and profitability, making this system a valuable choice for beef cattle grazing programs in the Canadian and Pacific Northwest beef industries.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wasden et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: