![Sample our Environment & Agriculture journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5934/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Environment-Agriculture.jpg"})
Abstract
Previous research indicated that tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) may respond to sulfur (S) fertilization. However, data are limited concerning S management options to improve yield and quality of newly-established, endophyte-free tall fescue. Thus, a field study was conducted from 1989 to 1991 to determine the effects of S source (ammonium thiosulfate [ATS] and ammonium sulfate [AS]); rate (17 and 34 kg S ha−1); and placement (broadcast, dribble [surface band], and knife [subsurface band]) on yield and quality of a newly-established, endophyte [Neotyphodium coenophialum (Morgan-Jones and W. Gams) Glenn, Bacon, Price & Hanlin; syn. Acremonium coenophialum Morgan-Jones and W. Gams]-free, tall fescue. Compared to a no-fertilizer control, adding N alone more than tripled hay production to 6.09 Mg ha−1, but the addition of fertilizer S had little effect on early-season production and only a 6% increase in later hay yields with ATS. Sulfur fertilization increased tissue S concentration and lowered N/S ratios. Increasing the S rate from 17 to 34 kg ha−1 resulted in a small increase in S concentration and decrease in N/S ratio. Correlation analyses suggested that increasing S concentrations may reduce neutral-detergent fiber content and improve in vitro dry matter digestibility early in the season but not at hay harvest. Fescue sampled to simulate grazing in early spring yielded less but was higher in N/S ratios when S was knifed rather than surface applied. At hay harvest, knifing increased yield more than 10% and increased N concentration by 10 to 20% compared to surface application methods but had no effect on in vitro dry matter digestibility.
1 Contribution No. 00-233-J, Kansas Agric. Exp. Stn. Research partially supported by grant funds from the Fluid Fertilizer Foundation, Kerley Ag, Inc., The Sulphur Institute, and Allied-Signal, Inc.
Acknowledgments
Notes
1 Contribution No. 00-233-J, Kansas Agric. Exp. Stn. Research partially supported by grant funds from the Fluid Fertilizer Foundation, Kerley Ag, Inc., The Sulphur Institute, and Allied-Signal, Inc.
* Company name is included for the benefit of the reader and does not imply any endorsement or preferential treatment by Kansas State University.