Abstract
Sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] is one of the most important forage crops in arid and semiarid regions, and its yield and nutritive value are affected by the harvesting stage. A 2-year field experiment was carried out during the 2017 and 2018 growing seasons to evaluate the forage potential of sorghum cultivars at different harvesting stages. Experimental factors included four harvesting stages (grain milk stage, grain soft dough stage, grain hard dough stage, and grain physiological maturity stage) and seven sorghum cultivars. The highest dry matter and protein yields (38.13 and 3.11 Mg ha−1, respectively) were obtained from cultivar Mashhad-1 at the grain physiological maturity stage, whereas the maximum relative feed value was recorded in cv. Karaj-16 at the grain milk stage. Moreover, the highest crude protein content (116 g kg−1), digestible organic matter (734 g kg−1), and metabolizable energy (2.73 Mcal kg−1) were obtained at the grain milk stage. The maximum panicle dry matter yield (19.39 Mg ha−1) and panicle ratio (552 g kg−1) were found in cv. Karaj-9 at the grain physiological maturity stage. The results of the principal component analysis also showed that with increasing maturity, forage yield increased, and its quality decreased. Overall, when both high forage yield and quality were considered, forage harvesting between the grain soft dough and grain hard dough stages could be recommended. Among the cultivars, the cv. Mashhad-1 with the maximum dry matter and protein yield and high metabolizable energy, digestible organic matter, and crude protein content could be introduced as the superior genotype.
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs42976-022-00244-7/MediaObjects/42976_2022_244_Fig1_HTML.png)
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- TDMY:
-
Total dry matter yield
- PDMY:
-
Panicle dry matter yield
- PAR:
-
Panicle ratio
- PLH:
-
Plant height
- STD:
-
Stem diameter
- PAL:
-
Panicle length
- TLN:
-
Tiller number
- CPY:
-
Crude protein yield
- CPC:
-
Crude protein content
- ADF:
-
Acid detergent fiber
- NDF:
-
Neutral detergent fiber
- EE:
-
Ether extract
- RFV:
-
Relative feed value
- DOMD:
-
Digestible organic matter
- ME:
-
Metabolizable energy
References
AOAC (2000) Official methods of analysis of AOAC international, 17th edn. The Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gaithersburg
Ashoori N, Abdi M, Golzardi F, Ajalli J, Ilkaee MN (2021) Forage potential of sorghum-clover intercrop** systems in semi-arid conditions. Bragantia 80:e1421. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4499.20200423
Atis I, Konuskan O, Duru M, Gozubenli H, Yilmaz S (2012) Effect of harvesting time on yield, composition and forage quality of some forage sorghum cultivars. Int J Agric Biol 14:879–886
Baghdadi A, Balazadeh M, Kashani A, Golzardi F, Gholamhoseini M, Mehrnia M (2017) Effect of pre-sowing and nitrogen application on forage quality of silage corn. Agron Res 15:11–23
Baghdadi A, Paknejad F, Golzardi F, Hashemi M, Ilkaee MN (2021) Suitability and benefits from intercropped sorghum–amaranth under partial root-zone irrigation. J Sci Food Agric 101(14):5918–5926. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.11244
Bakhtiyari F, Zamanian M, Golzardi F (2020) Effect of mixed intercrop** of clover on forage yield and quality. South-West J Hortic Biol Environ 11:49–66
Balazadeh M, Zamanian M, Golzardi F, Mohammadi Torkashvand A (2021) Effects of limited irrigation on forage yield, nutritive value and water use efficiency of Persian clover (Trifolium resupinatum) compared to berseem clover (Trifolium alexandrinum). Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 52(16):1927–1942. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2021.1900228
Blümmel M, Makkar HPS, Chisanga G, Mtimuni J, Becker K (1997) The prediction of dry matter intake of temperate and tropical roughages from in vitro digestibility/gas-production data, and the dry matter intake and in vitro digestibility of African roughages in relation to ruminant liveweight gain. Anim Feed Sci Technol 69:131–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(97)81628-8
Carmi A, Aharoni Y, Edelstein M, Umiel N, Hagiladi A, Yosef E, Nikbachat M, Zenou A, Miron J (2006) Effects of irrigation and plant density on yield, composition and in vitro digestibility of a new forage sorghum variety, Tal, at two maturity stages. Anim Feed Sci Technol 131:121–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.02.005
Glamoclija D, Jankovic S, Rakic S, Maletic R, Ikanovic J, Lakic Z (2011) Effects of nitrogen and harvesting time on chemical composition of biomass of Sudan grass, fodder sorghum, and their hybrid. Turk J Agric for 35:127–138. https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-0911-58
Hackmann TJ, Sampson JD, Spain JN (2008) Comparing relative feed value with degradation parameters of grass and legume forages. Anim Sci J 86:2344–2356. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0545
Izadi Yazdanabadi F, Esmailpor Akhlamad U, Omidi A, Behdani MA (2013) Evaluation of foxtail millet (Setaria italica) forage quality in different growth stages. J Agroecol 5(3):282–288. https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v5i3.29000
Jahanzad E, Jorat M, Moghadam H, Sadeghpour A, Chaichi MR, Dashtaki M (2013) Response of a new and a commonly grown forage sorghum cultivar to limited irrigation and planting density. Agric Water Manag 117:62–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.11.001
Keramat S, Eshghizadeh HR, Zahedi M, Nematpour A (2020) Growth and biochemical changes of sorghum genotypes in response to carbon dioxide and salinity interactions. Cereal Res Commun 48:325–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42976-020-00068-3
Khelil MN, Rejeb S, Henchi B, Destain JP (2013) Effects of irrigation water quality and nitrogen rate on the recovery of 15N fertilizer by sorghum in field study. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 44:2647–2655. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2013.813032
Lithourgidis AS, Vasilakoglou IB, Dhima KV, Dordas CA, Yiakoulaki MD (2006) Forage yield and quality of common vetch mixtures with oat and triticale in two seeding ratios. Field Crops Res 99:106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2006.03.008
Menke KH, Raab L, Salewski A, Steingass H, Fritz D, Schneider W (1979) The estimation of the digestibility and metabolizable energy content of ruminant feeding stuffs from the gas production when they are incubated with rumen liquor in vitro. J Agric Sci 93(1):217–222. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600086305
Menke KH, Steingass H (1988) Estimation of the energetic feed value obtained from chemical analysis and in vitro gas production using rumen fluid. Anim Res Dev 28:47–55
Milić D, Katanski S, Milošević B, Živanov D (2019) Variety selection in intensive alfalfa cutting management. Ratarstvo I Povrtarstvo 56(1):20–25. https://doi.org/10.5937/ratpov56-20528
Miron J, Solomon R, Adin G, Nir U, Nikbachat M, Yosef E, Carmi A, Weinberg ZG, Kipnis T, Zuckerman E, Ben-Ghedalia D (2006) Effects of harvest stage and re-growth on yield, composition, ensilage and in vitro digestibility of new forage sorghum varieties. J Sci Food Agric 86:140–147. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.2269
Mohajer S, Ghods H, Taha RM, Talati A (2012) Effect of different harvest times on yield and forage quality of three varieties of common millet (Panicum miliaceum). Sci Res Essays 7:3020–3025. https://doi.org/10.5897/SRE11.852
Monirifar H, Mirmozafari Roudsari A, Ghassemi S, Tavasolee A (2020) Harvest time and cultivar effects on growth, physiological traits, yield and quality of alfalfa in saline condition. Int J Plant Prod 14:453–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42106-020-00096-3
Punia H, Tokas J, Malik A, Satpal SS (2021) Characterization of phenolic compounds and antioxidant activity in sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] grains. Cereal Res Commun 49:343–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42976-020-00118-w
Ronga D, Dal Prà A, Immovilli A, Ruozzi F, Davolio R, Pacchioli MT (2020) Effects of harvest time on the yield and quality of winter wheat hay produced in Northern Italy. Agron 10(6):917. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10060917
Samdur MY, Patroti PD, Talwar HS, Sharma KK, Tonapi VA, Prabhakar P, Elangovan M, Kshirsagar YS (2021) Weighted geometric mean index: A model to evaluate drought tolerance in post-rainy season sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). Cereal Res Commun 49:329–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42976-020-00096-z
Sher A, Hassan F, Ali H, Hussain M, Sattar A (2017) Enhancing forage quality through appropriate nitrogen dose, seed rate and harvest stage, in sorghum cultivars grown in Pakistan. Grassl Sci 63:15–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/grs.12137
Sleugh BB, Moore KJ, Brummer EC, Knapp AD, Russell J, Gibson L (2001) Forage nutritive value of various Amaranth species at different harvest dates. Crop Sci 41:466–472. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2001.412466x
Snyman LD, Joubert HW (1996) Effect of maturity stage and method of preservation on the yield and quality of forage sorghum. Anim Feed Sci Technol 57:63–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(95)00846-2
Sultan JI, Rahim IU, Yaqoob M, Nawaz H, Hameed M (2008) Nutritive value of free rangeland grasses of Northern grasslands of Pakistan. Pak J Bot 40(1):249–258
Teixeira TPM, Pimentel LD, Dias LAS, Parrella RAC, Paixão MQ, Biesdorf EM (2017) Redefinition of sweet sorghum harvest time: New approach for sampling and decision-making in field. Ind Crops Prod 109:579–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.09.002
**e T, Su P, Shan L, Ma J (2012) Yield, quality and irrigation water use efficiency of sweet sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (Linn.) Moench] under different land types in arid regions. Aust J Crop Sci 6(1):10–16
Yosef E, Carmi A, Nikbachat M, Zenou A, Umiel N, Miron J (2009) Characteristics of tall versus short-type varieties of forage sorghum grown under two irrigation levels, for summer and subsequent fall harvests, and digestibility by sheep of their silages. Anim Feed Sci Technol 152:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2009.01.018
Yu P, Christensen DA, McKinnon JJ, Markert JD (2003) Effect of variety and maturity stage on chemical composition, carbohydrate and protein subfractions, in vitro rumen degradability and energy values of timothy and alfalfa. Can J Anim Sci 83:279–290. https://doi.org/10.4141/A02-053
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Seed and Plant Improvement Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran [Project number 03-03-0313-043-960461].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Khalilian, M.E., Habibi, D., Golzardi, F. et al. Effect of maturity stage on yield, morphological characteristics, and feed value of sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] cultivars. CEREAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS 50, 1095–1104 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42976-022-00244-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42976-022-00244-7