Next Article in Journal
Investment Decisions of Blockchain-Based Anti-Counterfeiting Traceability Services in a High-Quality Fresh Supply Chain of China
Previous Article in Journal
Genome-Wide Survey and Expression Analysis of B-Box Family Genes in Cucumber Reveal Their Potential Roles in Response to Diverse Abiotic and Biotic Stresses
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effects of Harvest Time on the Yield and Forage Value of Winter Forage Crops in Reclaimed Lands of Korea

1
Department of Crop Science, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, Chungnam National University, 99, Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 34134, Korea
2
Division of Crop Foundation, National Institute of Crop Science, Rural Development Administration, Wanju 55365, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2022, 12(6), 830; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12060830
Submission received: 18 April 2022 / Revised: 7 June 2022 / Accepted: 7 June 2022 / Published: 9 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Topic Plant Responses and Tolerance to Salinity Stress)

Abstract

:
This research was conducted to select the most suitable winter forage crop varieties for silage in reclaimed land located in the Midwest of Korea by investigating the soil environment, crop growth characteristics, dry weight, and forage value according to growth stage. The slightly alkalescent soil was characterized by a pH of 7.41–7.84, by an electrical conductivity (EC) of 1–2.5 dS/m, and by 440–934 mg/kg of available phosphate. Barley showed the highest chlorophyll content in the heading stage and milk stages, while oats and triticale reached the highest content in the milk and dough stage. In both years, triticale achieved the highest leaf area index (LAI), reaching 4.3–4.8. In addition, triticale showed the highest percentage of dry matter and the highest dry weight in the milk stage. Forage value was the best in the heading stage for all cereal crops; however, its quality decreased as the growth stage proceeded. This study suggests cultivating triticale, which showed high adaptability to reclaimed soil and climatic conditions, as well as good growth and dry weight when harvested between the milk and dough stages. These results indicate that triticale can be cultivated all year round in salty soil and these data can be useful to increase forage production in reclaimed soil.

1. Introduction

Soil salinization is a global environmental problem that negatively affects crop yield and thus poses a threat to the world’s food security [1]. Soil salinity is a major global problem because it negatively affects agricultural productivity and sustainability. In addition, soil salinity is spreading worldwide in over 100 countries, and no continent is entirely free from salinity [2]. Since mountains cover 65% of Korean territory, the cultivable land area is relatively small. For this reason, a land reclaiming project was launched as part of the national economic development plan in the 1960s, turning into a large-scale development system later in the 1970s [3].
During prolonged dry weather, water in the soil evaporates, and the salt contained in lower layers comes up to the soil’s surface by capillarity and eventually damages crops. Furthermore, the soil’s lack of chemical components and decreased air permeability and transmissibility make soil drainage difficult [4]. With increased irrigation, growth gets better, but a constant lack of water leads to water stress, with water absorption in the roots not being able to catch up with stomatal transpiration of leaves, which leads to a cessation of root growth and a decreased efficiency in nutrient absorption [5]. In addition, an increase in soil Na+ and Mg2+ content damages the structure of plant cells and impairs photosynthesis, inhibiting the production of chlorophyll [6]. In addition, an excessive concentration of various ions combined with high salinity causes enzyme inhibition, changing the metabolism and physiological functions of the plant. Salinity also increases competitive absorption between Na and K [7,8].
When soil salinity is excessive, most crops struggle with proper growth and development, resulting in reduced yield [9,10]. As a result, various studies have focused on cultivating salt-tolerant crops as a soil recovery method for sustainable agriculture in salinity-affected soils. When land reclamation started in Korea, native halophytes such as reed, Suaeda glauca, and glasswort were grown to improve the soil environment [11,12]. Cultivation focused on submerged rice farming [13]. Through the growth of halophytes, the rhizosphere could absorb salt, enhancing the fertility of the ground and the diversity of microorganisms and agricultural productivity [14]. Moreover, there are many ongoing types of research about salt-tolerant crops [15,16,17], soil improvement methods [18], and the addition of organic matter such as rice straw into the soil, facilitating soil aggregation to reduce salinity.
The Korean government is implementing projects to expand the production of fodder and support the cultivation of other crops in reclaimed land, to increase the use of reclaimed land, enhance the domestic self-supply of hay, and produce high-quality grass. There is much ongoing research on the double-cropping method for forage crops produced all year round, such as rice and Italian ryegrass [19], forage rice, forage barley [20], and others. Previous studies also suggest that harvesting crops between the ripening and the mature stages can maximize the yield per unit area through double-cropping (winter cereal plus a summer crop) [21,22]. In addition, reducing fallow ground during winter and selecting appropriate crops in reclaimed land could increase yield. Soil drainage and salinity affected germination, production, and growth when the soil was used for paddies rather than fields.
Hence, what matters is to choose crops suitable for different conditions, such as double-cropping, salt tolerance, and the possibility of cultivation in reclaimed land. Barley grains are widely used in human nutrition and in animal feeds, and the chemical composition and quality of barley grains change according to the characteristics of cultivated varieties, weather conditions and agricultural practice [23]. In the case of triticale, this has higher protein content than wheat, together with a more favorable amino acid balance, so most of the world’s production is used as ruminant forage or feed [23]. Oat grains have significantly less acreage of cultivation area globally than other cereal crops such as wheat and barley because their yield is lower than other grains [24]. Oats tolerate wet weather and acidic soils far better than other cereals [25], are resistant to diseases, and are used as human food and animal feed [23]. Among existing studies, very few have conducted cultivation experiment with crops such as oats, triticale, and barley under the weather condition and soil environment of reclaimed land in Central Western Korea. Therefore, this paper focuses on selecting crops that have excellent adaptability to reclaimed land in the central-west area, seeking out the best growth stage to harvest cereal crops based on growth, dry weight, and forage value of each crop.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Agronomy

From October 2018 to May 2020, this experiment progressed for two years in Seokmun reclaimed land, Songsan-myeon, Dangjin-si, Chungcheongnam-do (36°58′45″ N, 126°39′55″ E). The cereal crops used in this experiment were artificially crossbred by the National Institute of Crop Science and fostered by the pedigree breeding method. As a result, the cereal crops used in the investigation were salinity tolerant compared to other crops and resistant to cold weather. For this reason, barley, triticale, and oats, were selected (Table 1) because they are cultivatable in winter on reclaimed land.
The experiment was conducted on 16 October 2018 and 17 October 2019, respectively, in an area of 0.1 ha, and each cereal crop was planted through drill seeding at a concentration of 220 kg/ ha. As for the fertilizer, the amount for barley cultivation on paddy fields, N-P2O5-K2O = 91-74-39 kg/ha, was the standard. In addition, phosphorus and potassium were added as basal fertilizer for each field, and no pesticides and herbicides were used. The harvesting period in 2019 was April 26, May 3, and May 16, and in 2020 it was April 29, May 7, and May 14. Each crop was planted in three replicates of 1 m2 area each.

2.2. Plant and Soil Sampling and Analysis

Three replicates were collected from the same soil (0–20 cm from the surface). When harvesting crops, they were naturally dried for a week, and passed through a 2 mm-hole siege were used for analysis. The soil’s physical and chemical analysis were done according to NIAST, 2000, by the Rural Development Administration. As for soil chemical analysis, pH and electrical conductivity (EC), 5 g of soil and 25 mL of distilled water (1:5 ratio) were measured by a pH meter (CP-500 L, iSTEK, Seoul, Korea) and EC meter(Beckman). Exchangeable cations Ca, K, Mg, and Na were leached by distilled water and 1N-NH4OAc (pH 7.0), and the cations in the leachate were analyzed by ICP (Varian Vista-MPX, Varian, Palo Alto, CA, USA). Available phosphate was determined by the Lancaster method, organic matter (OM) by the Tyurin method, and cation exchange capacity (CEC) by the IN-ammonium acetate method. T-N was analyzed using organic elemental analysis (Vario MAX CNS, Elementar, Germany).

2.3. Measurement of Chlorophyll and LAI

Chlorophyll content of the leaves was measured utilizing a portable chlorophyll meter (SPAD-502Plus, Konica Minolta Sensing Americas, Inc, Ramsey, NJ, USA) which measures chlorophyll by light absorption rate of red light. The flag leaf and third leaf were measured in ten replicates, and the average was considered as the result. Leaf area index (LAI) was calculated using an LI-3100 Area Meter (Lincoln, NE, USA) with three replicates collected in from a 1 m2 area. The dry matter percentage represents the percentage of nutrients present, excluding water content, and was determined using the following formula: percentage of dry matter (%) = (dry weight/fresh weight) × 100.

2.4. Chemical Analysis

Samples for analysis were obtained after drying each of the three replicates according to the growth stage in a forced convection oven (LDO-150F) at 80 °C for 72 h. Then, their dry weight was measured, and leaves, stems, and grain samples were collected before grinding in the grinder. The content of crude protein (CP) was analyzed with the Kjeldahl system according to ACOAC (1990). Neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) were analyzed through the Goering& Van Soest (1970) method. Total digestible nutrient (TDN) was calculated using the official formula for forage value by Holland and Kezar (1192): TDN (%) = 88.9 − (0.79 × ADF (%)). Hemicellulose was calculated as Hemicellulose (%) = NDF (%) − ADF (%). Relative feed value (RFV) was calculated as RFV = DDM (%) × DMI (%)/1.29, using digestible dry matter (DDM) and dry matter intake (DMI) from DDM (%) = 88.9 − (ADF (%) × 0.779), DMI (%) = 120/NDF (%).

2.5. Statistical Analysis

Experimental data were statistically processed using the statistical analysis program, R Ver.4.1.2 (R Core Team, 2021). Two-way ANOVA analysis was carried out to determine the interaction between cereal crops and growth stage, and Duncan’s multiple range test was used for post verification. A significance level of p < 0.05, was chosen, and each analysis was executed at least three times.

3. Results

3.1. Weather and Field Condition

During the cultivation of cereal crops, temperature and precipitation data were collected from the Korea Meteorological Administration; the data are shown in Figure 1. In the middle latitudes temperate zone, Korea is characterized by cold and dry winters because of cold and dry continental anticyclones. In the central district, the experiment was conducted in Seokmun reclaimed land in Dangjin, Chungcheongnam-do. The mean air temperature in the first year was 12.3 °C in October 2018, 0.6 °C in December, and −1.1 °C in January 2019. The mean air temperature in the second year was 15.5 °C in October 2019, 1.8 °C in December, and 1.8 °C in January 2020. In addition, precipitation reached a peak at 153.2 mm in October in 2018, but in 2019 it fell relatively evenly except for 181.1 mm and 124.6 mm in September and November, respectively.
Field crop cultivation was possible because of some desalting. Table 2 shows data about the soil’s characteristics before seeding and by harvesting time. The experimental soil’s pH was between 7.41 and 7.84, which makes it alkalescent, and the EC average declined 1.5 times from 2.5 dS/m in 2019, to 1 dS/m in 2020. In both years, available phosphate was 440–934 mg/kg, higher than the appropriate amount, and the same applied to exchangeable cations such as K, Ca, and Ma. OM is matter in which organic substances are combined, and helps the plant sprout easily in soil with nutrients from feces and the remains of organisms. The average OM was 3.18% in 2019 and 2.92% in 2020, which are within the appropriate range based on reclaimed land.

3.2. Growth and Development Characteristics

Table 3 shows the data for barley, triticale, and oats collected in two years divided by the growth stage. In both years a significant difference (p < 0.05) was found in the tiller number and productive tiller in cereal crops, but both growth stage and interaction were statistically insignificant. Oats showed the highest values for tiller number and productive tiller. In the year 2019, the tiller number was 551.2, the productive tiller was 526.2, and in the year 2020, the tiller number was 672, and the productive tiller was 616. In the case of culm length and panicle length, a significant difference was found by growth stage and cereal crops, with it being within p < 0.05 for both years; interaction between these two factors was also found. Culm length was the highest in barley for both years, with 90.6 cm in 2019 and 84.5 cm in 2020, while oats had the greatest panicle length in both years, with 16.4 cm in 2019 and 9.9 cm in 2020. Triticale panicle length was also high, with 9.6 cm in 2020. In addition, excluding oats, barley and triticale showed the highest panicle and culm length during the milk stage.
As for chlorophyll content, no significant statistical difference was shown in cereal crops in 2019, but there was a significant difference (p < 0.05) by growth stage. Barley showed the highest values in the flag leaf at 46.6, and triticale had the highest in third leaf a 39.1. Overall, flag leaf and third leaf values were the highest during the heading stage in all cereal crops, but oats sometimes showed the highest value of flag leaf during the milk stage. As for chlorophyll content in 2020, a significant difference (p < 0.05) was found between cereal crops, but no significant difference was found in flag leaf by growth stage, while there was a substantial difference in the third leaf. Oats had the highest values, with 37.6 for the flag leaf and 31.9 for the third leaf. While barley showed the highest values during the heading and milk stages, triticale and oats showed the highest during the milk and dough stages.
Triticale’s LAI was the highest at 4.3 in 2019, and all cereal crops showed the highest LAI during the milk stage. No significant difference was found between cereal crops in 2020, but there was a significant difference (p < 0.05) by growth stage. In addition, triticale was the highest with 4.8, and all cereal crops showed the highest LAI during the heading stage.

3.3. Dry Weight and Percentage of Dry Matter

(Figure 2) shows the data regarding dry weight and percentage of dry matter of cereal crops by growth stage, collected over the two years.
Triticale showed the highest dry weight in all growth stages and was exceptionally high during the milk stage at 1223 g/m2. Regarding the percentage of dry matter, triticale showed the highest with 44.8% during the dough stage. As for dry weight in 2020, there was a significant difference within p < 0.05 between cereal crops, but there was no significant difference according to the growth stage. Triticale’s dry weight was high during the heading and milk stages, but barley’s dry weight was the highest during the dough stage with 540 g/m2, followed by triticale with 516 g/m2. Triticale showed the highest percentage of dry matter, with 39% during the dough stage. Oats had the highest values for both years with 683 g/m2 and 392 g/m2 during the dough stage, but the dry weight was significantly lower than in barley and triticale.

3.4. Chemical Analysis

Table 4 shows data about the forage value of cereal crops by growth stage collected over the two years. We conducted a two-way analysis of variance to investigate the difference between groups.
As a result of conducting a two-way analysis of variance to find out the difference between groups, a significant difference (p < 0.05) between cereal crops and growth stage was found for both years with interactions, except for the growth stage of NDF in 2019.
The data confirmed that CP decreased as the days elapsed after the heading stage in all cereal crops. The mean CP value of triticale was the highest, at 10.4, in 2019, and barley’s CP value was the highest, at 9.1, in 2020. Regarding CP, triticale showed the highest values, with 16.4% during the heading stage in 2019, and barley had the highest, with 9.3% in the milk stage and 6.7% in the dough stage. On the other hand, barley had the highest in 2020, with 13.4% in the heading stage and 8.9% in the milk stage. Oats had the highest with 6.5% during the dough stage.
NDF and ADF are cell wall components that form the structure of plants, making livestock feel full when ingested. Therefore, they are important indicators of feed quality, forage intake and digestibility. In 2019, the mean of NDF was the lowest in triticale, and ADF was the lowest in barley, but in 2020, both NDF and ADF were the lowest in oats. The lower these values, the better the quality of the coarse fodder. As for NDF, triticale had the lowest value in 2019 with 60.9% in the heading stage, while barley had the lowest with 64.4% in the milk stage; triticale showed the lowest with 62.8% in the dough stage.
Barley had the lowest ADF at 22.4% during the heading stage, while triticale at 29.9% had the lowest during the milk stage and barley at 34.5% during the dough stage. In 2020, the lowest NDF was detected in oats during the heading stage and milk stage at 43% and 57.2% respectively, while triticale had the lowest during the dough stage at 56.7%. As for ADF, during the heading and milk stages, oats had the lowest at 20.2% and 26.2%, while barley had the lowest at 30.5% during the dough stage.
The mean TDN was high in barley and triticale in 2019, while oats showed the highest value in 2020. As for TDN, barley had the highest in 2019 at 71.2% during the heading stage, while triticale had the highest at 65.3% during the milk stage and barley had the highest at 61.6% in the dough stage. In 2020, oats had the highest at 72.9% in the heading stage and 68.2% in the milk stage, while barley had the highest with at 64.8% in the dough stage. In terms of hemicellulose, in 2019 barley had the highest amount at 39.9% in the heading stage while triticale had the highest at 34.8% in the milk stage, and barley at 30.8% in the dough stage. In 2020, barley had the highest for all three stages at 26.1, 31.7, and 34.8%.
RFV is an index of potential digestible energy and is also used as an indicator for the ranking of grass forages based on the amount of intake, by using the quality class of dry grass as a standard. Usually, if it is over 100, the forage value is considered good. All cereal crops showed the highest result during the heading stage and quality steadily decreased as the growth stage proceeded. In 2019, the highest was shown in triticale at 94.5 during the milk stage, followed by barley at 89.2 and oats at 87.0. In 2020, oats had the highest at 111.3, followed by barley at 105.2 and triticale at 101.5; triticale’s value was high at 102.8 even in the dough stage.

4. Discussion

This research was carried out to provide useful information regarding forage value and winter cultivation of cereal crops in relation to the increased utilization of fallow land in winter times in reclaimed land. In a country with limited national territory, such as Korea, farm income can be increased by maximizing the yield per unit area through efficient land application and a double-cropping system. In addition, an increase in forage quality can be expected by selecting the proper harvesting time to improve the forage’s efficiency, which enhances the preference of livestock by satisfying the requirements for digestion and absorption.
In general, the soil pH values were within the optimal range for barley production, with average values ranging between 6.0 and 6.6 [26]; however, it was confirmed that the pH of reclaimed soil in our study was 7.41–7.84, which was higher than the mean values. Nonetheless, crop growth was still possible. EC was 1–2.5 dS/m, and organic matter was 2.92–3.18%. Available phosphate was higher than the appropriate range at 440–934 mg/kg, and the exchangeable cations K, Ca, and Mg were also higher than the minimum amount. In general, it was observed that the structural stability was reduced due to the low organic matter in soil affected by salinity [27]. Accordingly, compost, manure, and fertilizer were applied to enhance the soil quality and yield of crops, and the yield was increased under the condition of salinity stress and soil remediation [28,29]. The effectiveness of fertilizer, manure, and other additions has been proved in various studies, which also report that in reclaimed land in Korea, fertilizer and manure addition are part of the conventional farming method carried out before cultivating crops. Judging from their presence in conventional agricultural soils, there is a high probability that both available phosphate and exchangeable cation K, Ca, and Mg have been accumulated for a long period of time. According to [30], when organic matters such as livestock compost were applied in excessive amounts, or used for a long time, effective phosphoric acid was excessively accumulated in the topsoil with a maximum of 1547 mg/kg−1 and an average of 554 mg/kg−1. In addition, exchangeable cations were higher than the appropriate range, with 8.9 of Ca, 0.89 of K, and 2.0 of Mg. Similar results were found in this experiment.
Usually, drought conditions in saline soils adversely affect crop growth due to negative effects on plant water relations [31]. In saline soil, during rainfall the salinity decreases, but otherwise the salinity increases. Therefore, high-salinity pastures show that crops can be competitive if the soil is high in moisture [32]. During the experiment, the temperature in the year 2020 was 1.2 °C higher than in 2019. The precipitation in 2020 was reduced to 80 mm, which was half the amount of 2019, but precipitation reached a peak of 100–120 mm of rainfall in November and May, showing a wide range of weather differences. In the case of culm length, panicle length, and LAI, growth was better in 2020 than in 2019 during the heading stage. However, growth was reduced during the milk and the dough stages due to the dramatic increase in temperature in May and concentrated rainfall. According to a study by [33], it was confirmed that DM (dry matter) depended heavily on the environment, such as soil conditions and high temperatures. Similar to the study of [34], the results showed that if the temperature increases by 1 °C during wheat cultivation, the production decreased by 3–10%. Another study [9] also confirmed that crops are highly dependent on soil salinity and climate, and crop yield changes according to seasonal dynamics. In the case of triticale, reaction to pH was the lowest since triticale has a higher tolerance compared to barley, and the result of this research was partly consistent with studies in which yield varied widely among crops over the years [35]. In addition, compared to the growth period of the first planting, it was observed that rainfall was halved during the second growth period, and more severe stress conditions were imposed due to high air temperature, leading to a decrease in yield [36,37].
In 2019, triticale showed the highest values for both panicle length and culm length at 11.8 cm and 99.5 cm, respectively, during the milk stage. In 2020, barley culm length was the highest at 87.7 cm in the heading stage, and oats panicle length was the highest at 12.5 cm in the dough stage. Since oats reach maturation later than other cereal crops, it is better to harvest them in June rather than May to obtain the best yield [38]. It was also confirmed in this research that as the oat growth stage proceeded and growth gradually increased, it reached the highest in the dough stage. In general, leaf growth is reduced compared to root growth in dry soil with high salinity due to factors related to water stress rather than salt-specific effects [5]. In many crops, leaf chlorophyll content and its indirect assessment via soil plant analysis development (SPAD) have been demonstrated to be heritable traits related to leaf physiology, yield, and quality of the crop [39].
In this experiment, in 2019, when the chlorophyll content was between 30 and 50, on average, for flag leaves and third leaves, the LAI averaged 3.7–4.3 for each of the three varieties, and in triticale it was the highest at 4.5 during the milk stage, which is the growth stage. In addition, in 2020, when the chlorophyll content was between 20 and 40, the LAI averaged 4.6–4.8, which was relatively higher than in 2019. In the milk stage, the LAI was the highest in triticale at 4.2. As leaf chlorophyll is a major pigment for leaf photosynthesis in the chloroplast, leaf chlorophyll concentration is very important in the production of biomass in plant leaves [40]. In other words, improving the photosynthetic ability of plants by increasing the amount of chlorophyll is one of the strategies for improving the growth and yield of crops [41]. In this experiment, considering dry weight and percentage of dry matter, triticale showed a higher value with respect to the other two crops, particularly during the milk stage. According to the research results of [42], wheat had the greatest dry matter, followed by triticale, barley, with oat showing the lowest. Triticale showed the lowest reaction to pH, since it has a higher tolerance compared to barley, and the results of this research were consistent with other studies where the yield was very diverse each year [35]. Five types of barley were harvested at three stages of maturity (bloom, milk, and dough), with the same results as in other studies where dry weight was the highest in the bloom and milk stage [43]. A study by [44] suggested that not all crops grow at the same speed and pattern, and that the best stage to harvest them is the soft dough stage.
In this study, results were consistent with those of a study reporting an increase in dry weight of cereal crops and a decrease in forage value as the growth stage proceeded [45]. It was observed that as the growth stage proceeded, CP of all the cereal crops decreased; the same results were reported in other existing studies [45,46]. This is believed to be due to the increased proportion of stems to total dry weight by harvesting time after the heading stage. NDF and ADF values were the lowest during the heading stage in both years, but in barley and oats these values increased from the ripening milk stage to the dough stage. This is consistent with a research result showing that forage barley’s NDF increased as the maturity stage of whole-crop cereal proceeded [46]. On the other hand, triticale’s NDF decreased as the maturation came close to the dough stage, in agreement with other research results where NDF usually stayed the same or decreased as maturity proceeded [47,48]. According to [33], it seems that as the seed ratio increases rapidly in triticale after harvest and increase of seed ratio leads to an accumulation of starch. Accordingly, it is inferred that this contributes to lowering the NDF and ADF contents, and also the TDN content. In another study [49], the relationship between maturity stage and NDF was different between cereal forages, suggesting that this could have an effect on determining the optimal harvest season.

5. Conclusions

Although pH and EC were higher than the reference values, barley, triticale, and oats could be cultivated in this experiment. However, precipitation and temperature had a significant impact on the growth of three cereal crops, and although there were many differences in the growth and dry weight between 2019 and 2020, consistent results were Attained between each of the three cereal crops. Forage value was the best during the heading stage, but it decreased considerably as the growth period went on. In addition, regarding the growth and dry weight of all three cereal crops, the yield was expected to increase during the milk and dough stages rather than the heading stage. Considering all the results, it was determined that triticale is the most adaptable crop to the environment of reclaimed land in central western Korea, and the crop which shows the highest dry weight. However, due to lack of consistency in crop yields and climate each year, more diverse types of research are needed in the future. Hence, multilateral research is required to draw conclusions, and additional follow-up studies are necessary. Furthermore, research comparing the yield of crops when converting rice paddies to field cultivation is also needed.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.J. and J.C.; validation, J.C.; formal analysis, Y.J.; investigation, Y.J., B.C. and K.S.; resources, J.C. and S.L.; data curation, Y.J. and S.L.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.J.; writing—review and editing, J.C.; supervision, J.C.; project administration, S.L.; funding acquisition, S.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was conducted with the support of the research project (project number: PJ0138822019) of the Rural Development Administration in Korea.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

This work completed with the support of the Rural Development Administration and person in charge of Seokmun reclaimed land and all the staff. First of all, we thank the reviewers for their valuable time and opinion on our manuscript, and thank Jinwoong Cho and Suhwan Lee for helping us complete the experiment safely.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ibrahimova, U.; Kumari, P.; Yadav, S.; Rastogi, A.; Antala, M.; Suleymanova, Z.; Zivcak, M.; Tahjib-Ul-Arif, M.; Hussain, S.; Abdelhamid, M.; et al. Progress in understanding salt stress response in plants using biotechnological tools. J. Biotechnol. 2021, 329, 180–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Shahid, S.A.; Zaman, M.; Heng, L. Soil Salinity: Historical Perspectives and a World Overview of the Problem. In Guideline for Salinity Assessment, Mitigation and Adaptation Using Nuclear and Related Techniques; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 43–53. ISBN 9783319961903. [Google Scholar]
  3. National Archives of Korea. Summary of land reclamation records. Available online: https://theme.archives.go.kr/next/koreaOfRecord/reclamationWork.do (accessed on 7 February 2022).
  4. De Vos, J.A.; Raats, P.A.C.; Feddes, R.A. Chloride transport in a recently reclaimed Dutch polder. J. Hydrol. 2002, 257, 59–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Munns, R. Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant Cell Environ. 2002, 25, 239–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kingsbury, R.W.; Epstein, E. Salt Sensitivity in Wheat. Plant Physiol. 1986, 80, 651–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Wang, L.-W.; Showalter, A.M.; Ungar, I.A. Effect of salinity on growth, ion content, and cell wall chemistry in Atriplex prostrata (Chenopodiaceae). Am. J. Bot. 1997, 84, 1247–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Flowers, T.J.; Dalmond, D. Protein synthesis in halophytes: The influence of potassium, sodium and magnesium in vitro. Plant Soil 1992, 146, 153–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ivits, E.; Cherlet, M.; Tóth, T.; Lewińska, K.E.; Tóth, G. Characterisation of Productivity Limitation of Salt-Affected Lands in different Climatic Regions of Europe using Remote Sensing Derived Productivity Indicators. Land Degrad. Dev. 2013, 24, 438–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Cao, D.; Li, Y.; Liu, B.; Kong, F.; Tran, L.P. Adaptive Mechanisms of Soybean Grown on Salt-Affected Soils. Land Degrad. Dev. 2018, 29, 1054–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Oh, Y.-Y.; Kim, S.; Ryu, J.-H.; Lee, S.-H.; Lee, J.-T.; Bae, H.-S.; Kim, Y.-J.; Kim, K.-Y. Decomposition Characteristics and Seedling Growth of Common Reed (Phragmites australis) by Salt Concentration in Saemangeum Reclaimed Land. J. Environ. Sci. Int. 2019, 28, 1061–1069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kim, J.-Y.; Seong, P.-M.; Lee, D.-B.; Chung, N.-J. Growth and physiological characteristics in a halophyte Suaeda glauca under different NaCl concentrations. Korean J. Crop Sci. 2019, 64, 48–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Back, N.-H.; Ko, J.-C.; Nam, J.-K.; Kim, B.-K.; Park, H.-K.; Kim, S.-S.; Kim, C.-K. Optimum Water Management Practices for Direct Seeding on Paddy Surface of Saline in Soils in Reclaimed Tidelands. Korean J. Crop Sci. 2007, 52, 204–207. [Google Scholar]
  14. Shao, H.; Chu, L.; Lu, H.; Qi, W.; Chen, X.; Liu, J.; Kuang, S.; Tang, B.; Wong, V. Towards sustainable agriculture for the salt-affected soil. Land Degrad. Dev. 2019, 30, 574–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lee, K.-B.; Kang, J.-G.; Li, J.; Lee, D.-B.; Park, C.-W.; Kim, J.-D. Evaluation of salt-tolerance plant for improving saline soil of reclaimed land. Korean J. Soil Sci. Fertil. 2007, 40, 173–180. [Google Scholar]
  16. Oh, Y.-Y.; Lee, J.-T.; Hong, H.-C.; Kim, J.-H.; Seo, W.-D.; Kim, S.; Ryu, J.-H.; Lee, S.-H.; Kim, Y.-J. The Selection of Proper Resource and Change of Salinity in Helianthus tuberosus L. Cultivated in Saemangeum Reclaimed Tidal Land. Korean J. Environ. Agric. 2018, 37, 73–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Cho, C.; Kim, K.H.; Ahn, E.-K.; Park, H.; Choi, M.-S.; Chun, J.; Seo, M.-S.; Jin, M.; Kim, D.-Y. Selection of Salt-Tolerant Silage Rice Through in vitro Screening and Saltol QTL Analysis. Korean J. Crop Sci. 2020, 65, 214–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Yang, J.; Park, J.-H.; Yoon, Y.-H.; Ju, J.-H. Comparison of the High Concentration Calcium Chloride (CaCl2) Salt Reduction Effect of Soil Amendment Agent and Planting Pennisetum alopecuroides. Korean J. Environ. Ecol. 2020, 34, 345–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Oh, M.; Choi, B.R.; Lee, S.Y.; Jung, J.S.; Park, H.S.; Lee, B.H.; Kim, K.-Y. Study on the Forage Cropping System of Italian Ryegrass and Summer Forage Crops at Paddy Field in Middle Region of Korea. J. Korean Soc. Grassl. Forage Sci. 2021, 41, 141–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Choi, W.-Y.; Song, T.-H.; Kim, S.; Lee, J.-H.; Jeong, J.-H.; Kim, S.-J.; Lee, K.-B. Desalinization of Flooding Periods and Growth of Whole Crop Barley as Early Exposure Area in “Saemangeum” Newly Reclaimed Land. Korean J. Crop Sci. 2013, 58, 136–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Siefers, M.K.; Huck, G.L.; Turner, J.E.; Pendergraft, J.S.; Bolsen, K.K.; Young, M.A. Agronomic and silage quality traits of winter cereals. Kans. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Rep. 1996, 0, 68–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Heggenstaller, A.H.; Anex, R.P.; Liebman, M.; Sundberg, D.N.; Gibson, L.R. Productivity and Nutrient Dynamics in Bioenergy Double-Cropping Systems. Agron. J. 2008, 100, 1740–1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Biel, W.; Kazimierska, K.; Bashutska, U. Nutritional Value of Wheat, Triticale, Barley and Oat Grains. Acta Sci. Pol. Zootech. 2020, 19, 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Brand, T.; Cruywagen, C.; Brandt, D.; Viljoen, M.; Burger, W. Variation in the chemical composition, physical characteristics and energy values of cereal grains produced in the Western Cape area of South Africa. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 2003, 33, 117–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Givens, D.; Davies, T.; Laverick, R. Effect of variety, nitrogen fertiliser and various agronomic factors on the nutritive value of husked and naked oats grain. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2004, 113, 169–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Cammarano, D.; Holland, J.; Ronga, D. Spatial and Temporal Variability of Spring Barley Yield and Quality Quantified by Crop Simulation Model. Agronomy 2020, 10, 393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Yang, L.; Bian, X.; Yang, R.; Zhou, C.; Tang, B. Assessment of organic amendments for improving coastal saline soil. Land Degrad. Dev. 2018, 29, 3204–3211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Mbarki, S.; Cerdà, A.; Brestic, M.; Mahendra, R.; Abdelly, C.; Pascual, J.A. Vineyard Compost Supplemented with Trichoderma Harzianum T78 Improve Saline Soil Quality. Land Degrad. Dev. 2017, 28, 1028–1037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Oo, A.N.; Iwai, C.B.; Saenjan, P. Soil Properties and Maize Growth in Saline and Nonsaline Soils using Cassava-Industrial Waste Compost and Vermicompost with or Without Earthworms. Land Degrad. Dev. 2015, 26, 300–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lee, C.-R.; Hong, S.-G.; Lee, S.-B.; Park, C.-B.; Kim, M.-G.; Kim, J.-H.; Park, K.-L. Physico-Chemical Properties of Organically Cultivated Upland Soils. Korean J. Org. Agric. 2015, 23, 875–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Setter, T.L.; Waters, I.; Stefanova, K.; Munns, R.; Barrett-Lennard, E.G. Salt tolerance, date of flowering and rain affect the productivity of wheat and barley on rainfed saline land. Field Crop Res. 2016, 194, 31–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Bakker, D.M.; Hamilton, G.J.; Hetherington, R.; Spann, C. Productivity of waterlogged and salt-affected land in a Mediterranean climate using bed-furrow systems. Field Crop Res. 2010, 117, 24–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Delogu, G.; Faccini, N.; Faccioli, P.; Reggiani, F.; Lendini, M.; Berardo, N.; Odoardi, M. Dry matter yield and quality evaluation at two phenological stages of forage triticale grown in the Po Valley and Sardinia, Italy. Field Crop Res. 2002, 74, 207–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. You, L.; Rosegrant, M.W.; Wood, S.; Sun, D. Impact of growing season temperature on wheat productivity in China. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2009, 149, 1009–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Liu, D.L.; Helyar, K.R.; Conyers, M.K.; Fisher, R.; Poile, G.J. Response of wheat, triticale and barley to lime application in semi-arid soils. Field Crop Res. 2004, 90, 287–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Saab, M.T.A.; Sellami, M.H.; Giorio, P.; Basile, A.; Bonfante, A.; Rouphael, Y.; Fahed, S.; Jomaa, I.; Stephan, C.; Kabalan, R.; et al. Assessing the potential of cereal production systems to adapt to contrasting weather conditions in the Mediterranean region. Agronomy 2019, 9, 393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Flohr, B.M.; Hunt, J.R.; Kirkegaard, J.A.; Evans, J.R. Water and temperature stress define the optimal flowering period for wheat in south-eastern Australia. Field Crop Res. 2017, 209, 108–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Sohn, Y.-M.; Jeon, G.-Y.; Song, J.-D.; Lee, J.-H.; Park, M.-E. Effect of soil salinity variation on the growth of barley, rye and oat seeded at the newly reclaimed tidal lands in Korea. Korean J. Soil Sci. Fertil. 2009, 42, 415–422. [Google Scholar]
  39. Nigam, S.N.; Aruna, R. Stability of soil plant analytical development (SPAD) chlorophyll meter reading (SCMR) and specific leaf area (SLA) and their association across varying soil moisture stress conditions in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Euphytica 2008, 160, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Gitelson, A.A.; Gritz, Y.; Merzlyak, M.N. Relationships between leaf chlorophyll content and spectral reflectance and algorithms for non-destructive chlorophyll assessment in higher plant leaves. J. Plant Physiol. 2003, 160, 271–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Monirifar, H.; Mirmozaffari Roudsari, A.; Ghassemi, S.; Tavasolee, A. Harvest Time and Cultivar Effects on Growth, Physiological Traits, Yield and Quality of Alfalfa in Saline Condition. Int. J. Plant Prod. 2020, 14, 453–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Aboagye, I.A.; Rosser, C.L.; Baron, V.S.; Beauchemin, K.A. In Vitro Assessment of Enteric Methane Emission Potential of Whole-Plant Barley, Oat, Triticale and Wheat. Animals 2021, 11, 450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Polan, C.E.; Starling, T.M.; Huber, J.T.; Miller, C.N.; Sandy, R.A. Yields, Compositions, and Nutritive Evaluation of Barley Silages at Three Stages of Maturity for Lactating Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 1968, 51, 1801–1805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Lyu, D.; Doce, R.R.; Juskiw, P.; Zhou, G.; Baron, V.S. Diverse Grain-Filling Dynamics Affect Harvest Management of Forage Barley and Triticale Cultivars. Agron. J. 2018, 110, 1017–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ronga, D.; Dal Prà, A.; Immovilli, A.; Ruozzi, F.; Davolio, R.; Pacchioli, M.T. Effects of Harvest Time on the Yield and Quality of Winter Wheat Hay Produced in Northern Italy. Agronomy 2020, 10, 917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Hargreaves, A.; Hill, J.; Leaver, J.D. Effect of stage of growth on the chemical composition, nutritive value and ensilability of whole-crop barley. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2009, 152, 50–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Micek, P.; Borowiec, F.; Kowalski, Z. Digestion of whole-crop grain silage starch in ruminants. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 2001, 10, 49–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Rustas, B.O.; Bertilsson, J.; Martinsson, K.; Elverstedt, T.; Nadeau, E. Intake and digestion of whole-crop barley and wheat silages by dairy heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 2011, 89, 4134–4141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Khorasani, G.R.; Jedel, P.E.; Helm, J.H.; Kennelly, J.J. Influence of stage of maturity on yield components and chemical composition of cereal grain silages. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 1997, 77, 259–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Total amount of precipitation, monthly mean air temperature (Tmean), minimum (Tmin) and maximum (Tmax) air temperature recorded during the two-year growth period. (A) 2018–2019, (B) 2019–2020.
Figure 1. Total amount of precipitation, monthly mean air temperature (Tmean), minimum (Tmin) and maximum (Tmax) air temperature recorded during the two-year growth period. (A) 2018–2019, (B) 2019–2020.
Agriculture 12 00830 g001
Figure 2. Measurement of changes in dry weight and percentage of dry matter according to the growth period of three winter cereals over two years. (A) = 2018–2019, (B) = 2019–2020; heading stage: HS, milk stage: MS, dough stage: DS. Values with similar letters are not significantly different.
Figure 2. Measurement of changes in dry weight and percentage of dry matter according to the growth period of three winter cereals over two years. (A) = 2018–2019, (B) = 2019–2020; heading stage: HS, milk stage: MS, dough stage: DS. Values with similar letters are not significantly different.
Agriculture 12 00830 g002
Table 1. Information on cross breeding of barley, triticale and oats used in this experiment.
Table 1. Information on cross breeding of barley, triticale and oats used in this experiment.
Cereal CropsCultivarBinomial NameCross CombinationProvider
BarleyDachungHordeum vulgare L.IT213457/IT203540Rural Development Administration, Korea
TriticaleJoseong× Triticosecale Wittm ackFAHAD_5/RHINO1R.1D5+105D’5B’//FAHAD_5
OatDajoAvena sativa L.Swan(IT021338)/3/IT128172/7A202-210(IT128825)//CI7763(IT33501)
Table 2. Soil chemical characteristics of land reclamation in Korea during the two-year growth period.
Table 2. Soil chemical characteristics of land reclamation in Korea during the two-year growth period.
2018–2019
Cereal CropsGrowth StagespH
(1:5, w/w)
EC (dS/m)AP
(mg/kg)
Exchangeable Cation
(cmol+/kg)
T-N (%)OM (%)CEC
(cmol+/kg)
KCaMgNa
BarleyHS7.642.806850.8510.82.90.60.203.0511.64
MS7.822.706191.419.52.40.50.252.9110.87
DS7.672.826180.929.92.90.70.192.5410.30
TriticaleHS7.412.385960.919.82.50.30.242.9011.45
MS7.492.338120.999.42.60.30.223.0010.15
DS7.612.357641.169.92.60.30.203.4211.10
OatHS7.682.687951.1810.32.80.70.263.4211.48
MS7.582.387621.179.92.80.40.223.3112.01
DS7.672.477651.669.82.80.30.213.9611.22
Mean7.642.487201.1810.02.80.60.223.1811.20
2019–2020
Cereal CropsGrowth StagespH
(1:5, w/w)
EC (dS/m)AP
(mg/kg)
Exchangeable Cation
(cmol+/kg)
T-N (%)OM (%)CEC
(cmol+/kg)
KCaMgNa
BarleyHS7.411.505560.9911.82.30.40.222.4010.90
MS7.461.404441.1512.82.60.60.152.3710.62
DS7.451.514400.9512.92.70.60.203.0110.55
TriticaleHS7.560.808011.0811.62.40.10.162.7411.13
MS7.630.659011.4813.32.90.10.213.2912.80
DS7.540.788221.3511.72.90.20.203.4113.01
OatHS7.661.109341.3312.52.80.60.213.0011.62
MS7.450.657471.2112.32.60.40.202.7011.29
DS7.700.987521.3112.42.90.40.213.1112.10
Mean7.551.037081.2412.22.60.50.202.9211.57
Optimum soil range of reclaimed land6.0–7.0<2150–3500.5–0.65.0–6.01.5–2.0--2–3-
Growth stages (heading stage: HS, milk stage: MS, dough stage: DS), Abbreviations: electrical conductivity (EC); available phosphate (AP); total nitrogen (T-N); organic matter (OM); cation exchange capacity (CEC).
Table 3. Growth and development characteristics according to the growth period of three winter cereals for two years.
Table 3. Growth and development characteristics according to the growth period of three winter cereals for two years.
2018–2019
Cereal CropsGrowth StagesTN
(No./m2)
PT
(No./m2)
CL
(cm)
PL
(cm)
ChlorophyllLAI
(m2)
Flag Leaf3rd Leaf
BarleyHS312.3270.079.34.753.946.33.9
MS408.3397.396.45.248.535.44.1
DS337.3335.096.15.137.425.83.4
Mean352.6b334.1b90.6a5.0c46.6a35.8ab3.8b
TriticaleHS416.0257.771.511.751.449.74.1
MS359.3349.799.511.847.037.44.5
DS362.0350.392.511.339.130.24.3
Mean379.1b319.2b87.8a11.6b45.8b39.1a4.3a
OatHS549.7490.755.813.549.339.73.6
MS573.0563.759.617.951.736.34.1
DS531.0524.372.817.838.030.13.4
Mean551.2a526.2a62.7b16.4a46.3ab35.4b3.7b
CV (%)17.620.65.47.18.712.411.7
Cereal crops************NSNS*
Growth stageNSNS************NS
C × GNSNS*****NSNSNS
2019–2020
Cereal CropsGrowth StagesTN (No./m2)PT
(No./m2)
CL
(cm)
PL
(cm)
ChlorophyllLAI
(m2)
Flag Leaf3rd Leaf
BarleyHS189.7181.087.74.835.933.86.1
MS203.7201.085.14.941.727.13.6
DS218.0217.380.84.730.619.64.0
Mean203.8b199.8b84.5a4.8b36.1ab26.8b4.6b
TriticaleHS230.7219.751.38.729.728.05.1
MS189.7186.776.710.534.326.14.2
DS238.0237.771.29.734.524.55.1
Mean219.5b214.7b66.4b9.6a32.8b26.2b4.8a
OatHS837.7686.719.98.635.332.96.0
MS613.0597.029.78.737.130.33.0
DS565.3564.346.312.540.332.54.9
Mean672.0a616.0a32.0c9.9a37.6a31.9a4.6b
CV (%)44.037.97.67.29.612.523.2
Cereal crops***************NS
Growth stageNSNS******NS****
C × GNSNS********NS
Growth stages (heading stage: HS, milk stage: MS, dough stage: DS), Abbreviations: tiller number (TN); productive tiller (PT); culm length (CL); panicle length (PL); leaf area index (LAI). *** p value < 0.001, ** p value < 0.01, * p value < 0.05, ns: non-significant.
Table 4. Chemical composition according to the growth period of three winter cereals for two years.
Table 4. Chemical composition according to the growth period of three winter cereals for two years.
2018–2019
Cereal CropsGrowth StagesCPNDFADFTDNHemicelluloseRFV
(%)
BarleyHS14.762.322.471.239.9106.7
MS9.364.434.861.429.689.2
DS6.765.434.561.630.888.3
Mean10.2a64.0b30.6a64.7a33.4a94.7a
TriticaleHS16.460.927.867.033.1102.8
MS8.264.629.965.334.894.5
DS6.662.835.760.727.090.6
Mean10.4a62.8a31.1a64.3a31.6b96.0a
OatHS13.762.234.761.527.592.6
MS8.265.335.860.629.587.0
DS6.065.436.560.028.886.0
Mean9.3b64.3b35.7b60.7b28.6c88.5b
CV (%)5.81.43.51.43.72.3
Cereal crops****************
Growth stage******************
C × G**NS************
2019–2020
Cereal CropsGrowth StagesCPNDFADFTDNHemicelluloseRFV
(%)
BarleyHS13.456.029.965.326.1109.6
MS8.959.527.867.031.7105.2
DS5.165.330.564.834.892.8
Mean9.1a60.3b29.4b65.7b30.9a102.5c
TriticaleHS12.953.028.966.024.1116.5
MS6.358.831.763.827.1101.5
DS5.456.733.762.323.0102.8
Mean8.2b56.2a31.4c64.0c24.7c106.9b
OatHS11.243.020.272.922.8158.4
MS8.057.226.268.231.0111.3
DS6.565.434.661.630.888.2
Mean8.6ab55.2a27.0a67.6a28.2b119.3a
CV (%)6.43.13.51.29.02.7
Cereal crops*****************
Growth stage******************
C × G****************
Growth stages (heading stage: HS, milk stage: MS, dough stage: DS), Abbreviations: crude protein (CP); neutral detergent fiber (NDF); acid detergent fiber (ADF); total digestible nutrient (TDN); relative feed value (RFV). *** p value < 0.001, ** p value < 0.01, * p value < 0.05, ns: non-significant.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jang, Y.; Choi, B.; Sharavdorj, K.; Lee, S.; Cho, J. Effects of Harvest Time on the Yield and Forage Value of Winter Forage Crops in Reclaimed Lands of Korea. Agriculture 2022, 12, 830. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12060830

AMA Style

Jang Y, Choi B, Sharavdorj K, Lee S, Cho J. Effects of Harvest Time on the Yield and Forage Value of Winter Forage Crops in Reclaimed Lands of Korea. Agriculture. 2022; 12(6):830. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12060830

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jang, Yeongmi, Bumsik Choi, Khulan Sharavdorj, Suhwan Lee, and Jinwoong Cho. 2022. "Effects of Harvest Time on the Yield and Forage Value of Winter Forage Crops in Reclaimed Lands of Korea" Agriculture 12, no. 6: 830. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12060830

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop