Journal of The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science (한국초지조사료학회지)

The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science (한국초지조사료학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Agronomic Characteristics of Sorghum × Sudangrass Hybrids 'Cadan 99B' and 'Sweet Sioux WMR' in Middle and Southern Region of Korea

중부 및 남부지역에서의 수수 × 수단그라스 교잡종 'Cadan 99B' 및 'Sweet Sioux WMR' 품종특성

  • Hwang, Tae-Young (National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Ji, Hee Chung (National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Kim, Ki Yong (National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Lee, Sang-Hoon (National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Lee, Ki-Won (National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Kim, Ki-Su (Jeollanam-do, Agricultural Research and Extension Services, Live Stock Research Center) ;
  • Choi, Gi Jun (National Institute of Animal Science, RDA)
  • 황태영 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원) ;
  • 지희정 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원) ;
  • 김기용 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원) ;
  • 이상훈 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원) ;
  • 이기원 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원) ;
  • 김기수 (전라남도 농업기술원 축산연구소) ;
  • 최기준 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원)
  • Received : 2017.05.02
  • Accepted : 2017.10.26
  • Published : 2017.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study was carried out to introduce of agronomic characteristics, forage yields and quality of Sorghum ${\times}$ Sudangrass hybrids 'Cadan 99B' and 'Sweet Sioux WMR' from 2015 to 2016 in middle and southern regions of Korea. The field experiment design was complete in seven varieties with three repetitions. Sorghum ${\times}$ Sudangrass hybrids were sown on mid-May in middle region, and end-May in southern region of Korea, in 2015 and 2016. The observed average heading date of Cadan 99B and Sweet Sioux WMR were July 22. The heading dates of Cadan 99B and Sweet Sioux WMR were 8 days earlier than SX-17 and 5 days earlier than brown mid-rid (BMR) Revolution. The sugar contents of Cadan 99B and Sweet Sioux WMR were 6.5 and $6.9Brix^{\circ}$, respectively. Comparison with BMR variety, the sugar contents of Candan 99B and Sweet Sioux WMR were 0.2 and $0.6Brix^{\circ}$ higher than Revolution, respectively. The average of dry matter (DM) yield for 2 years and 2 regions of Cadan 99B (24,587kg/ha) were the highest among the seven varieties, but there was no significant difference among other varieties except headless control variety Jumbo (19,119kg/ha) and LATTE (20,778kg/ha) (p>0.05). The crude protein (CP) and in vitro dry matter digestibility (IVDMD) of Cadan 99B were 7.5% and 60.2%, and Sweet Sioux WMR were 6.9% and 60.7%, respectively. The results of this study indicated that Sorghum ${\times}$ Sudangrass hybrids Cadan 99B and Sweet Sioux WMR are earlier heading dates and higher than SX-17, and high yields of DM in middle and southern regions of Korea.

본 연구는 중부 및 남부지역에서 수수 ${\times}$ 수단그라스 교잡종 Cadan 99B 및 Sweet Sioux WMR 의 농업적 특성, 생산성 및 품질을 소개하기 위해 2015년부터 2016년까지 2년에 걸쳐 수행되었다. 대비품종은 출수형인 SX-17, 비출수형인 Jumbo 및 BMR 품종인 Revolution을, 시험품종은 LATTE, EXP-AD, Cadan 99B 및 Sweet Sioux WMR 4개 품종을 공시하였다. 시험설계는 3반복 난괴법으로 수행하였으며, 중부지역 파종은 5월 중순, 남부지역은 5월 하순에 실시하였다. 1차 수확은 7월 하순부터 8월 상순까지, 2차 수확은 9월말에서 10월 상순까지 2015년 및 2016년에 실시하였다. Cadan 99B 와 Sweet Sioux WMR의 출수기는 7월 22일이었으며, 출수형 대비품종인 SX-17 및 BMR 대비품종인 Revolution 보다 각각 8일 및 5일 빠르게 나타났다. Cadan 99B 와 Sweet Sioux WMR의 당도는 각각 6.5 및 $6.9Brix^{\circ}$로 BMR 대비품종인 Revolution 보다 각각 0.2 및 $0.6Brix^{\circ}$ 높게 관찰되었다. 2년간 2개 지역 평균 건물수량의 경우 Cadan 99B는 24,587kg/ha로 7개의 품종 중에 가장 높게 나타났지만 비출수형 대비품종 Jumbo 및 시험품종 LATTE를 제외하고는 유의성이 나타나지 않았다(p>0.05). Cadan 99B의 조단백질(CP) 함량과 in vitro 건물소화율은 각각 7.5% 및 60.2%로 나타났으며, Sweet Sioux WMR의 경우 6.9% 및 60.7%로 나타났다. 본 연구의 결과에 따르면 수수 ${\times}$ 수단그라스 교잡종 Cadan 99B 및 Sweet Sioux WMR은 국내 중부 및 남부지역에서 대비품종들 보다 출수가 빠르고 당 함량이 높게 나타났으며, 건물수량은 출수형 대비 품종인 SX-17 같거나 높게 나타났다. 따라서 Cadan 99B와 Sweet Sioux WMR은 국내기후에 적합하여 수량성 및 품질이 양호한 품종으로 나타났기 때문에 인증품종으로 선발될 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. AOAC. 1990. Official Methods of Analysis, 15th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington DC.
  2. Bell, J., Xue, Q., McCollum, T., Brown, T., Sirmon P. and Pietsch, D. 2015. 2014 Texas Panhandle Sorghum Silage Trial. Texas A&M Agrilife Research Extension.
  3. Bell, J., McCollum, T., Pietsch, D., Schnell, R., Sirmon P. and Tyrer, D. 2016. 2015 Texas Panhandle Sorghum Silage Trial. Texas A&M Agrilife Research Extension.
  4. Cherney, J.H., Cherney, D.J.R., Akin, D.E. and Axtell, J.D. 1991. Potential of Brown-Midrib, Low-Lignin Mutants for Improving Forage Quality. Advances in Agronomy. 46:157-198.
  5. Goering, H.K., and Van Soest, P.J. 1970. Forage fiber analysis. Ag. Handbook. No. 379. ARS, USDA: Washington DC.
  6. Holland, C., Kezar, W., Kautz, W.P., Lazowski, E.J., Mahanna, W.C. and Reinhart, R. 1990. The pioneer forage manual. A nutritional guide. Pioneer Hi-Bred Int. Inc. Des Moines, LA.
  7. Jeon, B.T., Lee, S.M., Moon, S.H. and Kim, S.W. 1989. Studies on the productivity and adaptability of introduced Sorghum ${\times}$ Sudangrass hybrids in Jungweon and Chungju area. J. Kor. Kon Kuk Uni. Jungweon Institute. 8:143-153.
  8. Jeon, B.T., Moon, S.H. and Lee, S.M. 2012. A Comparative Studies on the growth Characteristics and Feed Components of Sorghum ${\times}$ Sudangrass hybrids at Paddy Field Cultivation. The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science. 32:29-38. https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2012.32.1.29
  9. Ji, H.J., Lee, S.H., Yoon, S.H., Kim, W.H. and Lim, Y.C. 2010. Growth, Forage Production and Quality of Sorghum, Sorghum ${\times}$ Sudangrass and Sudangrass Hybrids at Paddy Field in Middle Region of Korea. Journal of The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science. 30:9-14. https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2010.30.1.009
  10. Kim, D.A., Chun, U.B., Shin, C.N., Kim, J.G., Shin, D.E., Kim, W.H. and Kim, J.K. 1998. Evaluation of the Government Recommended Forage Cultivars in Korea. The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science. 18:1-10.
  11. Kim, J.D., Kwon, C.H., Kim, H.J., Park, J.G., Lee, B.S., Bing G.S. and Moon, S.T. 2002. Comparison of agronomic characteristics, forage yield and quality of Sorghum ${\times}$ Sudangrass hybrid. The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science. 22:297-302. https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2002.22.4.297
  12. Kwon, C.H., Kim, E.J. and Cho, S. 2014. Effects of BMR variety and Corn Grain (Grounded) Supplement on Silage Quality of Sorghum ${\times}$ Sudan Hybrids. The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science. 34:240-246. https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2014.34.4.240
  13. Lee, J.K., Kim, J.G., Shin, D.E., Yoon, S.H., Kim, W.H., Seo, S. and Park, G.J. 2000. Effects of Cutting Frequency on Yield and Nutritive Value Between Heading and Headless Varieties of Sorghum ${\times}$ Sudangrass Hybrid. The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science. 20:237-242.
  14. Li, J., Wang, L., Zhan, Q., Liu Y., Fu, B. and Wang, C. 2013. Sorghum bmr6 mutant analysis demonstrates that a shared MYB1 transcription factor binding site in the promoter links the expression of genes in related pathways. Functional & Integrative Genomics. 13:445-453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10142-013-0335-2
  15. Li, Y., Mao, P., Zhang, W., Wang, X., You, Y., Zhao, H., Zhai, L. and Liu, G. 2015. Dynamic Expression of the Nutritive Values in Forage Sorghum Populations Associated with White, Green and Brown Midrib Genotypes. Field Crops Research. 184:112-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2015.09.008
  16. Lim, Y.C., Sung, B.R., Choi, G.J., Rim, Y.W., Kim, K.Y., Lim, K.B. and Park, G.J. 2002. Studies on the Growth Characteristics, Forage Yields and Nutritive Values of Heading and Headless Types of Sorghum ${\times}$ Sudangrass hybrids. Journal of The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science. 22:213-220. https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2002.22.3.213
  17. MAFRA. 2016. Forage production and utilization for animal production. Minister of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs.
  18. Marsalis, M.A., Flynn, R.P., Lauriault, L.M., Mesbah, A. and O'Neill, M.K. 2014. New Mexico 2013 Corn and Sorghum Performance Tests. Agricultrual Experiment Station/Cooperative Extension Service. Collage of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences New Mexico State University.
  19. Moore, R.E. 1970. Procedure for the two-stage in vitro digestion of forage. Univ. of Florida, Dept. of Animal Sci.
  20. Moyer, J.L. 2015. Forage Production of Sorghum Cultivars. Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports. 1:1-3.
  21. Mutava, R.N., Prasad, P.V.V., Tuiunstra, M.R., Kofoid, K.D. and Yu, J. 2011. Characterization of Sorghum Genotypes for Traits Realted to Drought Tolerance. Field Crops Research. 123:10-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2011.04.006
  22. NACF. 2015. Report on adaptation of foreign grass and forage cultivars imported. National Agriculture Cooperative Federation (NACF).
  23. Oliver, A.L., Pedersen, J.F., Grant, R.J. and Klopfenstein, T.J. 2005. Comparative Effects of the Sorghum bmr-6 and bmr-12 Genes: I. Forage Sorghum Yield and Quality. Crop Science. 45:2234-2239. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2004.0644
  24. Poehlman, J.M. 1987. Breeding Sorghum and Millet. In: Breeding Field Crop. AVI Pub Co. Westport, CI. pp. 508-588.
  25. RDA. 2003. Agricultural research based on the test. Kor. Rural development administration.
  26. SAS. 2002. Statistical analysis system version 9.2. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC.
  27. Shin, C.N., Ko, K.H. and Kim, J.D. 2015. Comparison of Agronomic Characteristics, Productivity and Feed Values of Summer Sowing Sorghum Hybrids in Gyeongbuk. Journal of The Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science. 35:99-104. https://doi.org/10.5333/KGFS.2015.35.2.99
  28. Tilley, J.M.A. and Terry, R.A. 1963. A two-stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forage crops. Journal of British Grassland Science. 18:104-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1963.tb00335.x
  29. Undersander, D. 2003. Sorghums, sudangrasses, and sorghum sudangrass hybrids. Focus on forage 5:1-3