Farm & Ranch
[AgriLife Extension] Rotation, cover crops impact cotton yields more than tillage
By: Kay Ledbetter
Writer: Kay Ledbetter, 806-677-5608, skledbetter@ag.tamu.edu
Contact: Dr. Paul DeLaune, 940-552-9941 ext. 207, pdelaune@ag.tamu.edu
CHILLICOTHE – After eight years of research on no-till advantages and disadvantages with cotton crops, Dr. Paul DeLaune is convinced it’s not as much about the tillage as it is about the cover crop and/or rotation.
Dr. Paul DeLaune discusses cover crops at a recent field day on the Texas A&M AgriLife Research station south of Chillicothe. (Texas A&M AgriLife Communications photo by Kay Ledbetter)
DeLaune, a Texas A&M AgriLife Research environmental soil scientist in Vernon, said he has compared no-till, strip till and conventional till, as well as cotton with a terminated wheat crop in the Rolling Plains.
“What we’ve seen over eight years is you are really not changing carbon levels,” he said. “But we shouldn’t be looking at one thing only. Even though carbon levels aren’t changing, we’ve dramatically changed some soil physical properties.”
With cotton, DeLaune said there’s not much residue, so there is little change in infiltration rates between no-till and conventional till cotton.
“But we have seen a greater infiltration rate where we have a terminated wheat crop – doubled or tripled our infiltration rates,” he said.
While the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service program sometimes requires a multispecies cover crop to qualify for cost share programs, depending on the county, DeLaune said he has been experimenting with both single and mixed cover crops since 2011.
The monocultures he has researched include Austrian winter field pea, hairy vetch, crimson clover and wheat, and the mixed species included rye, wheat, hairy vetch, turnips and radishes. Cover crops are planted at lower than full seeding rates, which may differ from information seen in other parts of the country, he said.
DeLaune said everyone knows cover crops aren’t free, as there is cost for the seed and use of soil moisture, but the benefits can potentially outweigh the costs over time.
Austrian Pea cover crop on the Texas A&M AgriLife Research station south of Chillicothe. (Texas A&M AgriLife Communications photo by Kay Ledbetter)
“We have maintained our cotton yields. We have seen an increase in our soil nitrogen in the upper 6 inches, particularly following legume monospecies. We have seen a visible response to cotton behind those cover crops.”
He said his team measures neutron probes in all of the cover crop research plots every other week and he has compiled four years of moisture graphs.
“Yes cover crops use water,” DeLaune said. “But some people say cover crops make water. What they are talking about is increased infiltration. We pull soil moisture down by timing of cover crop termination in mid to late April, but if we get rains in May and plant in June, we get a much higher infiltration rate and by planting season, we are back to status quo.”
He said he likes to let the wheat form a head and stem before terminating it, adding that may use a little more water, but that’s what makes the residue, which is the key to protecting the soil surface, building root biomass and subsequently infiltration.
The ultimate goal with cover crops is to build soil structure and make it more functional, he said.
“With cotton on cotton, no-till alone is probably not going to cut it,” DeLaune said. “But we’ve done very well with just a wheat cover crop, that’s a $6 or $8 treatment per acre compared to the $20 to $25 per acre with a mix of some of these species.”
But cover crops alone are not the answer, he said.
“If you are doing continuous cotton, some type of cover crop would be good, but I would encourage a crop rotation,” DeLaune said. “I have data that shows a cotton-sorghum rotation can increase carbon more rapidly, increasing carbon levels in four years under the rotation, whereas we haven’t in eight years with cotton on cotton.”
-30-
Find more stories, photos, videos and audio at http://today.agrilife.org
Farm & Ranch
Forage Needs in the Fall
By Savannah Magoteaux
Two bales can look almost identical and feed very differently. Color, smell and leafiness tell part of the story, but a forage test tells you what your cattle are actually being offered. If you buy hay by the ton or are trying to stretch winter feed, that little lab sheet can be one of the cheapest management tools on the place.
Reading the report
Start with dry matter. Hay contains water, and labs report nutrients either “as fed” or on a dry-matter basis. Feeds are easiest to compare on a dry-matter basis because it takes moisture out of the comparison. Hay that is 90 percent dry matter is about 10 percent water.
Crude protein, usually abbreviated CP, is the number most people recognize. It estimates protein from the forage’s nitrogen content. Higher isn’t automatically better. The goal is to match the hay to the animal. A dry, mature cow in mid-gestation doesn’t need the same protein as a lactating cow, a growing replacement heifer or a young calf.
Energy matters just as much. Beef cattle forage reports commonly estimate energy as total digestible nutrients, or TDN. Low-TDN hay may fill a cow up before it supplies enough energy, particularly when her requirements rise late in gestation or during lactation. That is when you may need better forage, an energy supplement or a different feeding plan.
Fiber numbers explain why some hay looks coarse and why animals may not be able to eat enough of it. Neutral detergent fiber, or NDF, is closely tied to intake. As NDF climbs, cattle generally eat less because the forage moves through the digestive tract more slowly. Acid detergent fiber, or ADF, is tied to digestibility. Higher ADF generally means lower digestibility.
Some reports also include relative feed value or relative forage quality. These indexes help compare lots of forage, particularly alfalfa and mixed hay, but they aren’t a complete ration. They don’t replace looking at protein, energy, minerals, animal class and expected intake.
Then come the numbers you hope are boring. Nitrate testing matters when drought, heavy nitrogen fertilization, cloudy weather or other conditions have stressed the forage enough to cause nitrate accumulation. Sorghum-type forages, johnsongrass, corn and some weeds deserve particular attention. Nitrates stay in hay after it is cut and baled, so a risky crop doesn’t become safe just because it dried.
Minerals deserve a look, but this is where a hay report gets harder to interpret. Calcium, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium and other minerals may be listed, yet a complete mineral program depends on water, other feeds and local conditions. A high number isn’t always an advantage. Excessive potassium, for example, can interfere with magnesium use under some circumstances. If you are balancing a ration for high-risk animals, work with a nutritionist or Extension specialist rather than treating the lab sheet as a stand-alone mineral prescription.
Moisture tells another story. Hay baled too wet is at greater risk of heating and mold, and very wet hay can become a fire hazard as microbial activity raises its internal temperature. A test taken months later can’t reconstruct every storage problem, so inspect the stack, too. A musty odor, visible mold, unusual heat and dark discoloration are all reasons to investigate.
Getting a good sample
A hay test is only as good as the sample, and sampling is the step most likely to ruin a good analysis. A handful pulled from the outside of one convenient bale doesn’t represent a stack of 100 bales. Round bales aren’t uniform from the outside to the center, and one bale may not represent the whole cutting.
Texas A&M AgriLife recommends using a hay probe and collecting cores from multiple bales in a lot, then combining them into one representative sample. A coring probe reaches through the layers of the bale and gives the lab a much better cross-section. Test different cuttings, fields or hay types separately, and don’t blend samples from separate fields or cuttings to save the cost of a test if you will feed them as separate lots.
Putting the numbers to work
The most useful way to read the report is backward from the cattle. What class of animal will eat this hay, at what stage of production, and how much is she likely to eat? Once you answer those questions, the lab numbers start to mean something.
A mature dry cow in good body condition can often use lower-quality forage than a first-calf heifer nursing a calf. Young cattle need nutrients for growth on top of maintenance, and cold stress raises energy demand. A hay test becomes valuable when you pair it with those real-world differences.
Remember that price per bale isn’t the same as price per unit of nutrition. A cheap bale with very low energy and protein may require expensive supplementation, and better hay can turn out to be the lower-cost feed once you count waste and supplements.
Before buying, try putting two hay reports side by side. Compare dry matter, crude protein, TDN and fiber first. Then add delivered cost and likely feeding waste. A heavier, denser bale isn’t automatically more economical, and a greener bale isn’t automatically more nutritious. The numbers make the comparison fair.
Testing is especially valuable after a hard weather year. Drought hay may be lower in yield and higher in nitrate risk. Mature, rain-damaged hay may test lower in protein and energy than it looks. Hay cut from a fertilized field after stress may deserve a safety screen before it ever reaches a feeder.
A forage test won’t make poor hay better. It shows you where the gaps are before your cattle show them through lost condition or lower performance. One report can’t answer every feeding question, but it replaces several guesses with measurements, and that makes winter nutrition planning much more accurate.
Farm & Ranch
When Acorns Become a Problem
By Savannah Magoteaux
A heavy crop of acorns under an oak tree usually looks more like a sign of fall than a livestock problem. For most cattle in most years, that is all it is. Trouble starts when acorns stop being an occasional bite and become a meaningful part of the diet.
Oak leaves, buds and acorns contain tannins that can damage the digestive tract and kidneys when cattle eat enough of them. Green acorns are generally considered more toxic than mature brown ones, but either can cause problems if cattle eat too many.
The risk climbs when forage is short and cattle go looking for something else to eat. Drought, overgrazed pastures or simply a heavy acorn crop can set up that situation.
Cattle aren’t equally interested in acorns. A few animals in a herd may eat far more than the rest, which helps explain why cases can appear scattered.
Early signs can be vague. Affected cattle may go off feed, look depressed or become constipated. As the damage progresses, you may see dark or bloody manure, abdominal pain, frequent urination followed by reduced urine output, dehydration and weakness. Kidney failure is the most serious concern.
You can’t remove every acorn from a wooded pasture, so prevention comes down to keeping cattle from relying on them. Adequate forage and supplementation take away the incentive to eat large amounts.
You can also fence cattle away from heavily producing oaks for a while, especially when pasture conditions are poor. If several animals seem to be seeking out acorns, take a close look at the rest of the ration instead of assuming they will quit on their own.
If you suspect oak poisoning, call a veterinarian early. Treatment is supportive and does much more good before severe kidney damage sets in. Moving unaffected cattle away from the source and providing good-quality feed and water may prevent more cases.
Acorns are an important fall food for deer, squirrels and other wildlife, and a few acorns generally don’t spell disaster for cattle. The concern is quantity. A pasture full of oaks becomes a different management problem when grass is short, cattle are hungry and the ground is covered with something they are willing to eat.
Oak toxicity comes up most often in cattle, but other livestock can be affected, too. And the risk isn’t limited to acorns. Oak buds and young leaves also contain tannins, so spring can occasionally bring problems as well. In fall, though, the obvious temptation is lying on the ground where cattle can eat it quickly.
Watch where your cattle spend their time. If cows that normally graze open grass start camping under oaks and hunting acorns, that behavior tells you something.
Walk the pasture, estimate how much usable forage is left and check whether a few dominant animals are eating more than the rest. Hay or supplemental feed may help, but place it where all the cattle can reach it rather than assuming one feeder will solve the problem.
Oak poisoning can look like other illnesses, and no one can diagnose kidney damage from pasture observation alone. A veterinarian may use history, clinical signs and lab work to separate it from dehydration, digestive disease or other toxicities. That is another reason to mention a heavy acorn crop when you call. A detail that seems like an ordinary part of fall can be an important part of the history.
Your pasture plan doesn’t have to be complicated. If one wooded trap has a much heavier acorn crop than the rest, use another pasture while you still have the choice.
If you can’t move the herd, make sure hay and supplement are adequate before the animals get hungry enough to seek out acorns aggressively. Salt or mineral by itself won’t make up for a shortage of forage.
The problem usually fades as cattle eat through the crop or the acorns weather or get covered. Don’t return cattle that have already shown signs as soon as they look better, though. Kidney injury can be serious. Follow your veterinarian’s recommendations and reassess the pasture before turning recovered animals back out.
Farm & Ranch
Land Market Report
By Jared Groce
Late summer has been brutal on our livestock, our grass and the rural land market in North Texas. We currently have an astounding 42 months of inventory on hand in our report area, and the only properties selling are the ones priced right. Overpriced properties aren’t even getting looked at, much less receiving offers, so pricing your property correctly matters more than ever right now.
Many sellers are still picturing the daily price increases we saw in 2020 to 2023, but those days are behind us, and agents need to be more realistic with listing prices to get any activity for their clients. Hopefully the rains will come soon and bring more land buyers with them this fall, but right now it is still very much a buyer’s market. No one knows how long this dry spell will last, but it will likely take a flood to end it. The same is true of the weather!
They say the best time to plant a tree, or buy land, was 20 years ago, and the second-best time is today.
| County | Area | Acres | $/Acre | List Price | Sold Price | Sale/List | DOM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clay | Henrietta | 120.07 | $5,150 | $714,000 | $618,309 | 86.60% | 434 |
| Clay | Bellevue | 159.44 | $6,184 | $981,000 | $985,959 | 100.50% | 48 |
| Clay | Henrietta | 293 | $4,982 | $1,538,250 | $1,459,600 | 94.90% | 212 |
| Clay | Average | 190.84 | $5,438 | $1,077,750 | $1,021,289 | 94.00% | 231 |
| Collin | Anna | 11.08 | $84,356 | $1,200,000 | $935,000 | 77.90% | 634 |
| Collin | Average | 11.08 | $84,356 | $1,200,000 | $935,000 | 77.90% | 634 |
| Cooke | Muenster | 11 | $18,000 | $209,000 | $198,000 | 94.70% | 250 |
| Cooke | Gainesville | 19.3 | $16,580 | $345,000 | $320,000 | 92.80% | 541 |
| Cooke | Valley View | 96.23 | $15,500 | $1,679,215 | $1,491,565 | 88.80% | 194 |
| Cooke | Average | 42.18 | $16,693 | $744,405 | $669,855 | 92.10% | 328 |
| Denton | Sanger | 16.46 | $39,422 | $649,000 | $649,000 | 100.00% | 47 |
| Denton | Cross Roads | 10.35 | $97,575 | $1,200,000 | $1,010,000 | 84.20% | 40 |
| Denton | Sanger | 300 | $14,000 | $4,999,999 | $4,200,000 | 84.00% | 1,327 |
| Denton | Aubrey | 74.09 | $57,684 | $4,815,525 | $4,273,550 | 88.70% | 302 |
| Denton | Average | 100.22 | $52,170 | $2,916,131 | $2,533,138 | 89.20% | 429 |
| Grayson | Collinsville | 11.61 | $46,516 | $600,000 | $540,000 | 90.00% | 280 |
| Grayson | Van Alstyne | 18.8 | $58,511 | $1,175,000 | $1,100,000 | 93.60% | 280 |
| Grayson | Whitesboro | 30 | $37,984 | $1,170,000 | $1,139,506 | 97.40% | 277 |
| Grayson | Average | 20.14 | $47,670 | $981,667 | $926,502 | 93.70% | 237 |
| Jack | No sales reported | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Montague | Montague | 485 | N/A | $5,566,000 | N/A | N/A | 333 |
| Montague | Bowie | 26 | $12,244 | $323,500 | $318,352 | 98.40% | 743 |
| Montague | Montague | 37.3 | $10,327 | $428,950 | $385,195 | 89.80% | 1 |
| Montague | Saint Jo | 1,185 | $7,764 | $10,000,000 | $9,199,829 | 92.00% | 19 |
| Montague | Average | 433.33 | $10,112 | $4,079,613 | $3,301,125 | 93.40% | 274 |
| Wise | Sunset | 12 | $19,027 | $234,000 | $228,320 | 97.60% | 16 |
| Wise | Sunset | 12 | $19,027 | $234,000 | $228,320 | 97.60% | 14 |
| Wise | Chico | 11.44 | $24,476 | $299,000 | $280,000 | 93.60% | 24 |
| Wise | Chico | 10.25 | $29,265 | $315,000 | $300,000 | 95.20% | 12 |
| Wise | Average | 11.42 | $22,949 | $270,000 | $259,160 | 96.00% | 17 |
DOM = days on market
-
Country Lifestyles4 years agoScott & Stacey Schumacher: A Growth Mindset
-
Country Lifestyles10 years agoStyle Your Profile – What your style cowboy hat says about you and new trends in 2017
-
Horsefeathers13 years agoMount Scott: Country Humor with David Gregory
-
Outdoor11 years agoButtercup or Primrose?
-
Country Lifestyles10 years agoJune 2016 Profile – The man behind the mic: Bob Tallman
-
HOME10 years agoGrazing North Texas – Wilman Lovegrass
-
Country Lifestyles10 years agoDecember 2016 Profile, Rusty Riddle – The Riddle Way
-
The Natural Horseman9 years agoThis is why we do what we do — RayeAnn and Cisco






