Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Online
    • Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • Info For
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About JSWC
    • Editorial Board
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
    • Contact Us

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Online
    • Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • Info For
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About JSWC
    • Editorial Board
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
    • Contact Us
  • Follow SWCS on Twitter
  • Visit SWCS on Facebook
Research ArticleResearch Section

Forage species and canopy cover effects on runoff from small plots

M.L. Self-Davis, P.A. Moore, T.C. Daniel, D.J. Nichols, T.J. Sauer, C.P. West, G.E. Aiken and D.R. Edwards
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation November 2003, 58 (6) 349-359;
M.L. Self-Davis
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P.A. Moore Jr.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
T.C. Daniel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D.J. Nichols
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
T.J. Sauer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
C.P. West
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
G.E. Aiken
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D.R. Edwards
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT:

Studies have shown that the surface hydrology of a pasture system is influenced by its vegetative characteristics. As research continues on ways to prevent erosion and excessive nutrient loss from agricultural land, the effect that different forage species have on surface runoff requires further investigation. This study sought to evaluate the effect of five forage species at varying canopy heights (one day vs. six weeks growth post-harvest) on surface runoff and infiltration on 6.1 m × 6.1 m (20 × 20 ft) plots fertilized with poultry litter. The five forage species were: Alamo switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L), Caucasian bluestem (Bothriochloa caucasia (Trin.) C.E. Hubbard), Greenfield bermudagrass (CYNODON DACTYLON (L.) Pers.), Pete eastern gamagrass (Tripsacum dactyloides (L.) L), and Kentucky-31 tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.). Poultry litter was surface-applied annually at 8.97 Mg ha−1 (4.0 ton/acre). Rainfall simulations (5.0 cm hr−1) (2.0 in hr−1) were used to produce runoff events during spring, summer, and fall to examine seasonal variations. Although there were no statistical differences in runoff volumes between cut canopy and full canopy covers within a single species, runoff volumes were reduced by full canopies, for all seasons, by an average of 18% for all species except bermudagrass. Comparisons of runoff volumes between the different species showed that tall fescue had significantly lesser (30 mm) runoff for three of the four runoff events. There were no differences in runoff between the other four species, for any runoff event. Infiltration was on average 19% greater in tall fescue plots for all runoff events, compared to the other four species. Neutron probe data supported these results, with tall fescue plots consistently having average profile volumetric water content from 3 to 5 m3 m−3 (106 to 177 ft3 ft−3) lower at the 20 and 35 cm (7.9 and 13.8 in) depths. Results of this study show that tall fescue, when directly compared to the other forages in this study, is more effective at reducing runoff volumes and increasing infiltration, thereby reducing edge of field loss in forage systems.

Footnotes

  • M. LeAnn Self-Davis is an assistant professor at the Department of Chemistry and Engineering Sciences, Freed-Hardeman University in Henderson, Tennessee. Philip A. Moore Jr. is a research scientist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture — Agricultural Research Service at the University of Arkansas, in Fayetteville, Arkansas. Thomas C. Daniel and Charles P. West are professors at the Agronomy Department, University of Arkansas, in Fayetteville, Arkansas. Doyle J. Nichols is a research technician and Thomas J. Sauer is a research scientist, both at the U.S. Deapartment of Agriculture — Agricultural Research Service at the National Soil Tilth Lab in-Ames, Iowa. Glenn E. Aiken is at the U.S. Deapartment of Agriculture — Agricultural Research Service at the University of kentucky, in Lexington, Kentucky. Dewayne R. Edwards is a professor at the Department of Agricultural Engineering, University of Kentucky, in Lexington, kentucky.

  • Copyright 2003 by the Soil and Water Conservation Society

This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.

Log in using your username and password

Forgot your user name or password?

Purchase access

You may purchase access to this article. This will require you to create an account if you don't already have one.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation: 58 (6)
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
Vol. 58, Issue 6
November/December 2003
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Soil and Water Conservation.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Forage species and canopy cover effects on runoff from small plots
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Soil and Water Conservation web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 5 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Forage species and canopy cover effects on runoff from small plots
M.L. Self-Davis, P.A. Moore, T.C. Daniel, D.J. Nichols, T.J. Sauer, C.P. West, G.E. Aiken, D.R. Edwards
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation Nov 2003, 58 (6) 349-359;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Forage species and canopy cover effects on runoff from small plots
M.L. Self-Davis, P.A. Moore, T.C. Daniel, D.J. Nichols, T.J. Sauer, C.P. West, G.E. Aiken, D.R. Edwards
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation Nov 2003, 58 (6) 349-359;
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Livestock grazing and vegetative filter strip buffer effects on runoff sediment, nitrate, and phosphorus losses
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Smart control of agricultural water wells in western Iran: Application of the Q-methodology
  • Soil health through farmers’ eyes: Toward a better understanding of how farmers view, value, and manage for healthier soils
  • Policy process and problem framing for state Nutrient Reduction Strategies in the US Upper Mississippi River Basin
Show more Research Section

Similar Articles

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Early Online
  • Archive
  • Subject Collections

Info For

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers

Customer Service

  • Subscriptions
  • Permissions and Reprints
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy

SWCS

  • Membership
  • Publications
  • Meetings and Events
  • Conservation Career Center

© 2023 Soil and Water Conservation Society