as Agricultural Sciences 2156-8561 2156-8553 Scientific Research Publishing 10.4236/as.2026.178046 as-153164 Article Biomedical Life Sciences Earth Environmental Sciences Comparison of Level of Stocking on Clover and Ryegrass Cover Crops Sod-Seeded into Bermudagrass 0000-0001-5526-9793 Jr. Francis M. Rouquette 1 0000-0001-9142-7963 DeLaune Paul 2 0000-0002-5358-9926 Pinchak William 2 Norman Kelli 1 Turner Kyle 1 0000-0001-9498-9515 Smith Gerald 1 Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension Center at Overton, Overton, TX, USA Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension Center at Vernon, Vernon, TX, USA

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this data and manuscript.

 12 08 2026 08 2026 17 08 800 819 09 07 2026 10 08 2026 13 08 2026 © 2026 by the authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. 2026 This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2026.178046

Annual forages have been used as cover crops in cropland to provide cover to soil, reduce erosion and weed infestation, and enhance soil health. Mixed seedings of “Dixie” crimson clover (Trifolium incarnatum L.) and “Apache” arrowleaf clover (Trifolium vesiculosumSavi), “Nelson” annual ryegrass (Loliummultiflorum Lam.), and a combination of clovers and ryegrass were drilled into “Coastal” bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon [L.] Pers.) plots. During the following two years, cattle grazed these cover crops to predetermined residual stubble heights each late April to early June to assess effects of mob-stocking on cover crop forage accumulation and sustainability. During active vegetative growth of cover crops (April-May), ryegrass had the greatest forage accumulation in Year 1; whereas, ryegrass-clover mix had the greatest forage accumulation in Year 2, which had greater rainfall than Year 1. During active vegetative growth of the cover crops, there was no effect of grazed stubble heights on forage mass accumulation; however, the season-long forage mass accumulation (April-September) was reduced (P < 0.02) due to the 10 - 15 cm stubble height. For both years, the season-long forage accumulation was greatest (P < 0.003) for the non-overseeded bermudagrass-only plots. The non-N-fertilized clover and clover-ryegrass cover crop plots had similar season-long forage accumulation to the ryegrass plots that were fertilized with 56 kg N/ha. Thus, indirect evidence indicates a potential contribution of legume-derived nitrogen to this loamy fine sand. All grazed stubble heights used in this research were based on USDA-NRCS cover crop management guidelines for humid environments and showed these grazing regimens to be sustainable on a cover crop system with bermudagrass.

 Cover Crop Grazing Bermudagrass Ryegrass Clover 1. Introduction

The use of cover crops has long been applied to benefit ecosystems by enhancing soil health attributes. Cover crops have been defined by USDA [1] as crops including grasses, legumes and forbs used for seasonal cover and other conservation purposes. The USDA NRCS Cover Crop (Code 340) Conservation Practice Standard [2] provides national guidelines for planting seasonal grasses, legumes, and forbs as cover crops to support several factors influencing soil health, such as reducing erosion, increasing organic matter, utilizing excess nutrients, and suppressing weeds.

Warm-season perennial grasses such as bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon [L.] Pers.) and bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum Flüggé) are the foundation of pasture and forage systems across the Coastal Plains of the United States. Overseeding cool-season annual legumes and grasses into dormant warm-season perennial grass sods is a special type of cover cropping. Overseeding provides a cool-season cover for the dormant grasses; reduces pasture weed infestations; maintains actively growing roots for an extended season; and in the case of legumes, provides N for the system through biological nitrogen fixation [3]. Reference [4] documented that warm-season perennial, sod-forming grasses have been overseeded since the late 1950s with small grains and annual ryegrass [5]-[10]. Cool-season annual forages can be integrated via sod-seeding directly into warm-season perennial pastures, broadcasting onto closely grazed sod, or planting on prepared seedbeds. The sod-seeded cool-season annual grasses and clovers are capable of providing high-quality forage for 60 to 120 d when matched to local climate and soil conditions [11][12].

In a review of cool-season annual grasses and grass-clover systems for beef cattle in the southeastern United States, Reference [12] concluded that annual ryegrass, small grains (rye, triticale, wheat, oat), and annual clovers can collectively extend fall-winter-spring grazing, reduce reliance on conserved feeds, and improve animal performance relative to warm-season grass monocultures. Within the southeastern Coastal Plain, overseeding dormant bermudagrass and bahiagrass sods with annual ryegrass [13] has become a dominant strategy because of reliable establishment, high cool-season productivity, and broad adaptation, while annual clovers are used to enhance nutritive value and biological N inputs [12][14].

Successful overseeding relies on careful integration of establishment and grazing management. Reference [15] provided management strategies for bermudagrass overseeded with cool-season annual grasses and legumes for sustainable cow-calf production in the southeastern US. State Extension publications and technical bulletins for the southeastern Coastal Plain recommend closely grazing or mowing bermudagrass or bahiagrass sod prior to seeding to reduce competition and increase light at the soil surface, followed by drilling or broadcasting annual ryegrass and clover seed during regionally appropriate autumn planting windows [14][16]. These sod-seeding guidelines further emphasize that because clover seed is small and sensitive to planting depth, shallow placement and good seed-soil contact is important, with higher seeding rates recommended when broadcasting compared with no-till drilling. Grazing is typically deferred until cool-season forages reach adequate height and root development, after which moderate to high stocking densities in short grazing bouts help maintain vegetative growth, support clover persistence, and prevent heavy shading that could suppress the underlying bermudagrass. During the spring transition, aggressive grazing or clipping of ryegrass and clover is recommended to facilitate timely recovery of the warm-season sod. Failure to manage cool-season annual forages is frequently cited as a cause of delayed bermudagrass or bahiagrass regrowth in overseeded fields [12].

At the conservation practice level, overseeding of cool-season annuals into warm-season pastures on the southeastern Coastal Plain has been framed within USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Pasture and Hay Planting and Forage and Biomass Planting standards (Code 512) [17][18]. These standards require the use of adapted species and cultivars, adherence to locally validated planting rates, methods, and dates, and application of limestone and fertilizer according to soil test recommendations and Nutrient Management (Code 590) Plans [17]. The NRCS State-level 512 specifications and associated job sheets for the Coastal Plain emphasize inoculation of clover seed with appropriate Rhizobium strains, increased seeding rates for broadcast applications, and selection of seed mixtures (annual ryegrass plus crimson or arrowleaf clover) that meet forage and soil protection objectives under specific soil and climate conditions [19]-[21]. The 512 Standard is commonly applied in combination with Prescribed Grazing (Code 528), Forage Harvest Management (511), Herbaceous Weed Treatment (315), and Nutrient Management (590) to balance forage production with soil and water conservation goals in overseeded pasture systems [17][18].

While not a primary purpose of the USDA NRCS Cover Crop standard, livestock integration is one of five principles identified to provide a successful soil health foundation. This cooperative research between USDA NRCS and Texas A&M AgriLife Research was initiated to determine any needed modifications of Cover Crop Code 340 in humid ecosystems to include stocking management strategies for annual cool-season cover crops sod-seeded into a warm-season perennial grass. Specifically, our objectives were to document grazed stubble heights of overseeded cover crops into Coastal bermudagrass that may result in sustainable forage production.

 2. Methods and Materials 2.1. Site Description

This two-year study was conducted at the Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension Center at Overton (32.29˚ N, 94.98˚ W) from 2022 to 2024. To determine optimum grazing management strategies and any modifications of Cover Crop Code 340, a well-established stand of “Coastal” bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers] was sod-seeded with cover crops of clover (Trifolium sp.) (CLV), annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) (RYG), and a mix of CLV-RYG. The soil was a Lilbert loamy fine sand (Loamy, siliceous, semiactive, thermic Arenic Plinthic Paleudult).

Two soil samples per replicate plot were taken pre-treatment in December 2021 and post-treatment in December 2023. Each soil sample was divided into four depths: 0 - 10 cm, 10 - 20 cm, 20 - 40 cm, and 40 - 60 cm. Sample analyses were conducted at the Stephen F. Austin State University Soil, Plant, and Water Analysis Laboratory in Nacogdoches, Texas as follows: 1) Macros were extracted using Mehlich 3 and ran on a Thermo 7400 dual view Inductive Coupled Plasma [22][23]; 2) Soil pH (1:2 soil/water) was determined using a Metrohm pH meter [24]; 3) The EC (1:2 soil/water) was determined on a Mettler Toledo meter [25]; 4) The %CN was measured by total combustion using an Elementar Vario Max-Cube; 5) Organic carbon was determined directly using a total carbon analyzer by reducing the primary sample ignition furnace to 650˚C [26]-[28]. The furnace operates at 950˚C. Sample size was 250 mg; 6) The NH-4 and NO2 + NO3-N were measured with a 2 M KCL extraction and ran on a FIA Lab Cadmium Flow Injection instrument [29][30].

Figure 1 shows the field design for the two replicates of three cover crops and three grazing regimens with targeted residual stubble heights of 10 - 15 cm (GRZ1), 15 - 20 cm (GRZ2), and 20 - 30 cm (GRZ3). A well-established Coastal bermudagrass hay meadow was partitioned into two replicate sections, each at 24.3 m × 91.2 m. These replicates were further partitioned into 12 plots sized at 24.3 m × 7.6 m per plot. A 15 m wide alleyway was provided to allow cattle and machinery movements to and from plots. Cover crops (CLV, RYG, and CLV-RYG) were randomized within each of the three grazing regimens (GRZ1, GRZ2, and GRZ3).

Figure 1. Plot design with two replications of cover crop treatment of clover (CLV), ryegrass (RYG), and clover-ryegrass (CLV-RYG), and grazing regimens (GRZ1, GRZ2, GRZ3).

 2.2. Cover Crops and Data Collection

Annual cool-season cover crop forages included a mix of “Dixie” crimson clover (Trifolium incarnatumL.) and “Apache” arrowleaf clover (Trifolium vesiculusomSavi) (CLV); “Nelson” annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) (RYG); and a mixture of CLV and RYG (CLV-RYG). Cover crops were drilled at 18 cm spacing into bermudagrass (BG) sod with a Kincaid Great Plains Planter, Model No. 3P606NT, on November 17, 2022 in Year 1 and November 1, 2023 in Year 2. Average temperature and total rainfall for Years 1 and 2 are shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3, respectively. The drilled planted areas were 1.2 m wide with 18 cm spacing in the 7.6 m wide x 24.3 m long plots. Seeding rates included 22.4 kg/ha crimson + 11.2 kg/ha arrowleaf for CLV; 33.6 kg/ha for RYG; and the same rates each for CLV-RYG. In Year 1, all plots were hand-fertilized with 336 kg/ha of 0-18-18-8S-4.25Mg-0.18Bo on December 5, 2022. The RYG plots received 56 kg N/ha of 21-0-0 on February 28, 2023. The non-overseeded, non-grazed BG plots (BG only) received 56 kg N/ha of 21-0-0 on June 6, 2023. In Year 2, all plots received 336 kg/ha of 0-18-18-8S-4.25Mg-0.18Bo on December 7, 2023. The RYG plots received 56 kg N/ha of 21-0-0 on February 2, 2024, and non-grazed BG plots received 56 kg N/ha of 21-0-0 on June 7, 2024.

Figure 2. Temperature and rainfall at Overton, Texas for September 2022-September 2023.

Figure 3. Temperature and rainfall in Overton, Texas for September 2023-September 2024.

Three residual stubble height (STHT) goals were pre-assigned to plots: 10 - 15 cm (GRZ1), 15 - 20 cm (GRZ2), and 20 - 30 cm (GRZ3) to represent medium, low, and very low stocking rates on sod-seeded BG [31]. Reference [32] used a mixture of rye (Secale cereale L.) and oat (Avena sativaL.) as cover crops in a three-year experiment to evaluate N fertilization levels and three stocking rates to assess stubble residues on cotton lint production. Rye-oat plots were mob-stocked every 14 d to maintain stubble residues of heavy stocked (500 kg DM/ha), moderate stocked (1500 kg DM/ha), and light stocked (2500 kg DM/ha). Although cotton lint yield was not affected by stocking rates, heavy stocking rates reduced soil cover and allowed for increased weed presence.

In both years of our study, two grazing events during the active vegetative growth of the cover crops were required to achieve the three STHT goals. As forage accumulation reached targeted heights, CLV, RYG and CLV-RYG plots were each mob-stocked with 6 to 8 yearling steers (300 kg BW) for short periods (2 to 3 hours) each grazing event. Short grazing periods and lack of water facilities in the plots helped to prevent trampling of forage. Thus, this experiment to compare effects of residual stubble heights under brief grazing events does not provide an accurate accounting of stocking rate. Also, the presence of bermudagrass would affect overall stocking rates. Forage in each plot was grazed to the pre-assigned residual stubble height (STHT) and then remained ungrazed until forage accumulation allowed for another grazing event. In Year 1, the first grazing event was initiated on April 26. The RYG plots were grazed from April 26 to April 28; CLV was grazed from May 1 to May 5; and RYG-CLV was grazed from May 5 to May 10. The GRZ1 was achieved on the six assigned plots in an average of 10 hours over 3.75 days, GRZ2 in 7.3 hours over 2.75 days, and GRZ3 in 4 hours over 1.75 days. The second grazing event for all plots was initiated on June 6 and terminated on June 16, with GRZ1 achieved in 9.3 hours over 3.5 days, GRZ2 in 6.5 hours over 3 days, and GRZ3 in 5.5 hours over 2 days. In Year 2, both grazing events lasted an average of 3.3 days. The first grazing event of Year 2 was initiated on all plots on April 18 and terminated on April 25, with GRZ1 achieved in an average of 8.8 hours, GRZ2 in 6.6 hours, and GRZ3 in 3.8 hours. The second event was initiated on May 14 and terminated on May 22, with GRZ1 achieved in 8.3 hours, GRZ2 in 5.6 hours, and GRZ3 in 4.5 hours. In both years, forage mass samples were taken by hand-clipping forage at 5 cm height from two 929 cm2 quadrants in each plot. In Year 1, forage mass was harvested pre-grazing from all plots on April 18, May 30, and September 28, 2023. In Year 2, forage mass was harvested pre-grazing from all plots on April 15, May 14, June 25, and September 19, 2024.

Forage nutritive analyses were conducted by the Dairy One Forage Testing Laboratory [33]. At the initiation of stocking in April and May 2023, forage was hand-clipped from all plots. Forage collected for nutritive analyses represented a visual assessment of forage selected by cattle [34]. All analyses were conducted via NIRS except for the 48-hr In Vitro True Digestibility.

 2.3. Statistical Analysis

All data were analyzed using SAS 9.4 [35] with PROC GLIMMIX. For forage mass analyses, fixed effects included year, cover crop treatment, grazing regimen, and interactions. Replication was included as a random effect. For soil analyses, fixed effects included cover crop treatment, grazing regimen, soil depth, and interactions. Replication was included as a random effect.

 3. Results and Discussion

With Year being a highly significant (P < 0.001) factor affecting forage mass and accumulation, results and discussion will be presented by year.

3.1. Year 1

Cover crop residual stubble heights (STHT) during April and May 2023 were achieved for each grazing regimen (Table 1). Nutritive values for all treatments, including ungrazed BG, are shown for April (Table 2) and May (Table 3), 2023. This two-month period included maturation and seed set of cover crops; thus, there were substantial changes in nutritive value components.

Table 1. Cover Crop Residual Stubble Height (STHT) during Year 1 (2023).

Cover crop treatment 1 Grazing regimen 2 STHT goal April 26 - May 10 STHT achieved 3 June 6 - 16 STHT achieved 4
(cm) (cm) (cm)
RYG GRZ1 10 - 15 13 15
GRZ2 15 - 20 20 23
GRZ3 20 - 30 30 33
CLV GRZ1 10 - 15 10 13
GRZ2 15 - 20 20 18
GRZ3 20 - 30 28 28
CLV-RYG GRZ1 10 - 15 15 10
GRZ2 15 - 20 23 20
GRZ3 20 - 30 33 30

1RYG = ryegrass, CLV = clover, CLV-RYG = clover-ryegrass mix; 2GRZ1 = residual stubble height of 10 - 15 cm, GRZ2 = 15 - 20 cm, GRZ3 = 20 - 30 cm; 3Total grazing time ranged from 2 to 13.5 hours over a 1-to-4-day period; 4Total grazing time ranged from 1.5 to 13 hours over a 1-to-5-day period.

Forage Mass and Nutritive Value

Forage mass and accumulation for non-grazed BG and sod-seeded cover crops are shown for each of three harvest dates and overall seasonal total DM (Figures 4-8). At the April 18, 2023 harvest, there were differences (P < 0.0001) in forage mass between all cover crops and BG. As anticipated from previous experiments at Overton [36], annual RYG produced the most forage DM in April at nearly 4500 kg/ha (Figure 4). The May 30, 2023 harvest showed the influence of BG in all plots (Figure 5), and the total DM for both harvests (Figure 6) with BG producing the most DM at about 8400 kg/ha. The final harvest on September 28 was exclusively BG and illustrated BG accumulation as affected by cover crop treatments. The total for all harvests (Figure 8) showed the N-transfer contribution in the CLV and CLV-RYG plots, which had the same total DM yields as that of the RYG plots that received 56 kg N/ha during the spring. The non-grazed BG plots with 56 kg N/ha produced the greatest forage DM at more than 14,800 kg/ha. Forage nutritive values for both harvests are shown in Table 2 andTable 3.

Table 2. Forage nutritive value for April 2023.

Cover crop treatment 1 Grz 2 Forage 3 % Crude Protein % ADF % aNDF % Lig- nin % TDN IVTD 48 hr, % of DM Relative Feed Value % Calcium % Phophorus % Magnesium % Potassium % Sulfur % Ash DM
BG 0 BG 20 31 53 3.4 66 83 113 0.30 0.38 0.29 2.38 0.29 12
CLV 1 BG 22 29 49 3.2 70 83 127 0.37 0.35 0.30 2.66 0.29 10
CLV 1 CLV 18 34 40 6.6 67 82 148 1.63 0.15 0.32 1.67 0.15 8
CLV-RYG 1 CLV 25 27 33 8.2 62 77 193 1.53 0.46 0.46 1.22 0.31 11
CLV-RYG 1 RYG 12 34 53 4.3 65 82 110 0.34 0.23 0.33 2.76 0.18 10
RYG 1 BG 21 30 53 3.1 69 81 116 0.46 0.44 0.27 2.25 0.34 10
RYG 1 RYG 11 29 49 1.9 72 82 124 0.40 0.28 0.24 2.15 0.23 6
CLV 2 BG 24 26 46 2.8 70 88 138 0.52 0.44 0.31 2.70 0.32 11
CLV 2 CLV 18 30 38 6.0 70 83 162 1.48 0.20 0.33 1.10 0.10 7
CLV-RYG 2 BG 23 26 47 2.6 72 87 136 0.39 0.40 0.30 2.33 0.32 9
CLV-RYG 2 CLV 21 25 31 5.1 76 93 209 1.76 0.30 0.25 2.23 0.09 7
CLV-RYG 2 RYG 10 28 45 2.0 74 88 138 0.47 0.36 0.20 2.82 0.15 8
RYG 2 RYG 13 30 50 3.2 71 83 122 0.40 0.32 0.23 2.05 0.17 6
CLV 3 CLV 21 32 49 9.7 57 71 122 1.52 0.32 0.57 1.88 0.30 9
CLV-RYG 3 BG 24 27 47 1.6 74 86 136 0.50 0.38 0.34 2.22 0.29 9
CLV-RYG 3 CLV 21 25 30 5.0 75 93 215 1.87 0.32 0.31 1.52 0.06 7
CLV-RYG 3 RYG 9 26 43 1.7 75 90 149 0.47 0.36 0.20 2.88 0.13 8
RYG 3 RYG 11 31 51 3.2 70 81 118 0.38 0.31 0.27 1.86 0.19 7

1CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; 2Stocking regimen to achieve residual stubble height; 1 = 10 - 15 cm, 2 = 15 - 20 cm, 3 = 20 - 30 cm; 3Forage tested; CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; BG = bermudagrass.

Table 3. Forage nutritive value for May 2023.

Cover crop treatment 1 Grz 2 Forage 3 % Crude Protein % ADF % aNDF % Lig- nin % TDN IVTD 48 hr, % of DM Relative Feed Value % Calci- um % Phos-phorus % Magnes- ium % Potas- sium % Sulfur % Ash DM
BG 0 BG 13 34 65 3.7 60 71 89 0.37 0.24 0.16 1.50 0.36 7
CLV 1 BG 13 33 60 3.3 64 75 98 0.49 0.25 0.17 1.41 0.31 7
CLV 1 CLV 14 32 42 7.7 66 78 142 1.98 0.18 0.30 1.12 0.03 7
CLV-RYG 1 BG 15 31 61 2.1 66 76 98 0.43 0.22 0.18 1.68 0.43 8
CLV-RYG 1 CLV 13 37 45 7.6 58 71 124 1.51 0.16 0.27 1.15 0.08 6
CLV-RYG 1 RYG 13 35 57 3.4 66 80 101 0.37 0.31 0.18 2.40 0.21 8
RYG 1 BG 23 27 56 1.1 74 85 113 0.22 0.41 0.23 1.76 0.39 8
RYG 1 RYG 15 31 51 3.0 69 84 118 0.38 0.48 0.21 3.13 0.24 10
CLV 2 BG 13 33 61 3.3 64 75 97 0.36 0.25 0.14 1.71 0.32 7
CLV 2 CLV 14 34 43 8.0 63 76 134 1.62 0.21 0.17 2.05 0.07 7
CLV-RYG 2 BG 12 32 61 3.6 64 74 97 0.33 0.26 0.16 1.29 0.35 7
CLV-RYG 2 CLV 14 37 44 8.4 63 77 127 1.52 0.16 0.17 1.44 0.05 7
CLV-RYG 2 RYG 8 39 64 3.9 59 71 85 0.28 0.26 0.15 1.99 0.13 7
RYG 2 BG 20 31 59 1.8 71 82 103 0.41 0.43 0.21 2.52 0.44 8
RYG 2 RYG 13 33 58 3.7 65 81 102 0.36 0.42 0.22 2.83 0.21 10
CLV 3 BG 11 34 57 3.4 65 75 101 0.26 0.23 0.13 1.65 0.26 6
CLV 3 CLV 14 35 44 7.7 62 74 131 1.70 0.21 0.20 1.94 0.04 7
CLV-RYG 3 BG 12 32 62 3.6 63 73 95 0.32 0.23 0.15 1.21 0.26 5
CLV-RYG 3 CLV 13 35 43 7.3 61 74 132 1.51 0.14 0.17 1.31 0.04 6
CLV-RYG 3 RYG 8 40 63 4.4 55 67 85 0.23 0.26 0.14 1.48 0.13 5
RYG 3 BG 19 32 59 2.3 70 80 101 0.40 0.40 0.17 2.34 0.34 8
RYG 3 RYG 10 37 62 3.9 60 71 90 0.29 0.27 0.18 1.69 0.16 6

1CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; 2Stocking regimen to achieve residual stubble height; 1 = 10 - 15 cm, 2 = 15 - 20 cm, 3 = 20 - 30 cm; 3Forage variety tested; CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; BG = bermudagrass.

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop. a-d: Bars with different letters denote harvest amounts that differ at P < 0.0001.

Figure 4. Harvest 1 of Year 1 (4/18/23).

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop. a-d: Bars with different letters denote harvest amounts that differ at P < 0.0001.

Figure 5. Harvest 2 of Year 1 (5/30/23).

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop. a-d: Bars with different letters denote harvest amounts that differ at P = 0.0002.

Figure 6. Harvests 1 + 2 of Year 1 (4/18/23 - 5/30/23).

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop.

Figure 7. Harvest 3 of Year 1 (9/28/23).

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop. a-d: Bars with different letters denote harvest amounts that differ at P = 0.0002.

Figure 8. Total of all harvests for Year 1 (4/18/23 - 9/28/23).

 3.2. Year 2

The targeted and achieved STHT for grazing regimens on RYG, CLV, and CLV-RYG are shown for April and May 2024 (Table 4). Using various grazing times for each plot during a one-to-several-day period, daily management attention to plot height was very effective in meeting the STHT goals.

Table 4. Cover Crop Residual Stubble Height (STHT) during Year 2 (2024).

Cover crop treatment 1 Grazing regimen 2 STHT goal April 18 - 25 STHT achieved 3 May 14 - 22 STHT achieved 4
(cm) (cm) (cm)
RYG GRZ1 10 - 15 7.6 15.2
GRZ2 15 - 20 17.8 25.4
GRZ3 20 - 30 30.5 33.0
CLV GRZ1 10 - 15 10.2 15.2
GRZ2 15 - 20 20.3 22.9
GRZ3 20 - 30 28.0 33.0
CLV-RYG GRZ1 10 - 15 12.7 10.2
GRZ2 15 - 20 20.3 17.8
GRZ3 20 - 30 33.0 33.0

1CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; 2GRZ1 = residual stubble height of 10 - 15 cm, GRZ2 = 15 - 20 cm, GRZ3 = 20 - 30 cm; 3Total grazing time ranged from 1.5 to 12.5 hours over a 1-to-8-day period; 4Total grazing time ranged from 1.5 to 12.5 hours over a 1-to-10-day period.

3.2.1. Forage Mass and Nutritive Value

Forage DM and accumulation for all plots in 2024 are shown in Figures 9-15. At the first harvest on April 15, there was no difference in DM from RYG or CLV-RYG (Figure 9). At the second harvest on May 14, BG-only plots had the greatest DM mass at more than 2800 kg/ha, and CLV-RYG plots had more (P < 0.001) DM accumulation than CLV or RYG plots (Figure 10). The total forage mass for both harvests showed RYG and CLV-RYG plots to have the most DM (Figure 11). At the third harvest on June 25, BG only plots had nearly twice as much forage DM as the cover crop plots (Figure 12). A five-year experiment with “Coastal” BG documented that accumulation of DM mass was greater with a stubble height of 5 cm, infrequent harvests of 35 to 40 cm of growth, and the application of 268 kg N/ha [37]. They also showed that stubble height was less important for Coastal BG production than either frequency of defoliation or rate of N fertilizer. In our experiment, the combined forage DM from all three harvests

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop. a-d: Bars with different letters denote harvest amounts that differ at P < 0.0001.

Figure 9. Harvest 1 of Year 2 (4/15/24).

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop. a-d: Bars with different letters denote harvest amounts that differ at P = 0.0002.

Figure 10. Harvest 2 of Year 2 (5/14/24).

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop. a-d: Bars with different letters denote harvest amounts that differ at P < 0.0001.

Figure 11. Harvests 1 + 2 of Year 2 (4/15/24-5/14/24).

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop. Bars with different letters denote harvest amounts that differ atP < 0.0001.

Figure 12. Harvest 3 of Year 2 (6/25/24).

illustrated the productivity of BG-only vs the three cover crop plots (Figure 13). However, at the fourth harvest on September 19, all plots showed similar BG mass (Figure 14). This productivity of BG emphasized some evidence of nutrient cycling and available soil N from cover crop plots. Figure 15 shows the total forage DM for the season, with non-stocked BG producing the most forage at more than 20,000 kg/ha. This result was similar to other sod-seeded experiments that showed reduced BG DM production during spring from overseeding cool-season annual forages [36]. In addition, they showed that non-overseeded Coastal bermudagrass had a large number of weeds at the first harvest on May 7.

3.2.2. Soil Analysis

Initial soil samples sent to collaborators in Vernon, Texas, were lost in tornado destruction of buildings at the Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension Center at Vernon. However, final soil samples for treatments are shown in Table 5. Although all plots had received ECCE-100 limestone at 2242 kg/ha at the beginning of the experiment, soil pH was lower than expected. The NO2 + NO3 levels were significantly higher at the 0 - 10 cm depth compared to other soil depths. The %N was very low at all soil depths measured. Percent soil C was also low for cover crops, grazing regimens, and at all soil depths to 60 cm. The resultant C:N ratios of about 7.65 were similar across treatments and soil depths. Although there were some slight differences in soil components among cover crop plots, there was essentially no impact of grazing regimen on soil components. Organic matter remained low on this sandy loam, acidic soil and was not affected by cover crop treatment nor grazing regimen.

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop. a-d: Bars with different letters denote harvest amounts that differ at P = 0.0006.

Figure 13. Harvests 1 + 2 + 3 of Year 2 (4/15/24-6/25/24).

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop.

Figure 14. Harvest 4 of Year 2 (9/19/24).

1Cover crop: CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop. a-d: Bars with different letters denote harvest amounts that differ at P = 0.0045.

Figure 15. Total of all harvests for Year 2 (4/15/24-9/19/24).

Table 5. Cover crop soil analyses by cover crop treatment, stocking regimen, and soil depth, Year 2.

NO 2 + NO 3 pH EC P K Ca Mg S Na N C C:N OM
ppm us/cm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm % % %
Cover crop 1
CLV 13.93 4.56 97.97 93.85 81.81 380.47 f 56.31 13.75 63.24 0.11 0.80 7.45 1.61
CLV + RYG 20.04 4.52 94.40 87.35 85.43 312.49 fg 49.58 13.16 60.13 0.11 0.88 7.82 1.76
RYG 15.48 4.39 110.15 80.19 97.82 241.77 g 41.94 13.19 53.56 0.16 0.81 7.62 1.61
BG only 16.92 4.48 101.26 61.64 55.10 311.74 fg 47.23 13.77 69.07 0.49 0.86 7.82 1.72
Stocking regimen 2
GRZ1 15.26 4.64 d 87.03 92.79 106.87 407.58 h 62.95 h 15.61 j 57.13 0.13 0.74 8.23 1.49
GRZ2 18.32 4.37 e 110.36 84.20 73.62 247.23 i 41.00 i 12.66 k 61.02 0.09 0.75 7.86 1.50
GRZ3 15.87 4.45 e 105.13 84.39 84.56 279.93 i 43.88 i 11.84 k 58.77 0.16 1.00 6.80 2.00
Soil depth
0 - 10 cm 37.13 a 4.89 a 236.39 a 67.49 b 112.74 f 694.56 a 101.53 a 15.50 h 60.24 0.08 0.67 8.73 1.34
10 - 20 cm 13.14 b 4.14 c 71.42 b 107.05 a 74.28 g 141.13 c 25.15 c 13.37 hi 55.53 0.09 0.54 6.98 1.07
20 - 40 cm 8.73 b 4.24 c 62.47 bc 108.07 a 70.11 g 119.92 c 22.19 c 12.47 i 61.91 0.19 0.93 6.52 1.85
40 - 60 cm 6.94 b 4.69 b 33.08 c 65.91 b 96.28 fg 290.70 b 48.24 b 12.14 i 58.22 0.14 1.19 8.27 2.38

1CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; BG only = no cover crop, bermudagrass only; 2GRZ1 = residual stubble height of 10 - 15 cm, GRZ2 = 15 - 20 cm, GRZ3 = 20 - 30 cm; abc: Values followed by different superscripts differ at P < 0.0001; de: Values followed by different superscripts differ at P = 0.0024; fg: Values followed by different superscripts differ at P < 0.05; hi: Values followed by different superscripts differ at P < 0.02; jk: Values followed by different superscripts differ at P = 0.0004.

In a four-year experiment, Reference [38] used cereal grain rye as a cover crop that was grazed by cattle before no-till planting of cotton. When the rye canopy height approached 30 cm, 250 kg stocker cattle were added. Cattle were removed when rye had been grazed to a 10 to 15 cm stubble height. The four-year average lint yield tended to be greater for non-grazed treatments but were significantly different in only one year. Although grazing rye increased risk of reducing cotton lint yield in two out of four years due to soil moisture availability, there was a positive economic benefit to the grazing crop management system. Reference [39] grazed warm-season cover crops in the Texas Rolling Plains and reported that grazing did not affect stored soil water compared to ungrazed areas. Grazing a warm-season cover crop in the Southern Piedmont region of Georgia, US in which cattle consumed 90% of the available forage resulted in no substantial damage to the soil in a no-tillage experiment [40]. In the semi-arid Great Plains region of the US, Reference [41] reported that grazing cover crops did not negatively impact several components of soil health properties. However, they documented that grazing increased bulk density and decreased soil organic C. Reference [42] documented higher soil microbial biomass C with low stocking rates when cereal grain rye was overseeded in bermudagrass. They also reported that extending the length of grazing season of a plant improved soil health even in a bermudagrass system.

The loss of the initial pre-experiment soil samples did not allow for any indications of enhanced soil nutrient status due to treatments during this two-year experiment. However, the final soil analyses of the Lilbert loamy fine sand documented the inherently low organic matter, but the responsiveness of forage dry matter production to low levels of inorganic fertilization. Thus, the soil health status during this experimental period proved to be very effective in the overall forage production of cover crops and bermudagrass.

 3.3. Summary

The forage accumulation of cover crops during their active growth period (April-May) showed dominance of RYG in Year 1, but both RYG and CLV-RYG had more forage mass than CLV in Year 2 (Table 6). In addition, there were no effects of grazing regimen on forage mass during the active vegetative growth stages of cover crops in either year. Total season long forage accumulation for both years is shown in Table 7. With BG mass included, there were no differences in total season forage mass between cover crops in either year, although Year 2 had substantially more DM accumulation than Year 1 as a response to increased rainfall (Figure 2 and Figure 3). In both years, the targeted STHT of 10 - 15 cm resulted in less total season forage accumulation than both the 15 - 20 cm and 20 - 30 cm STHTs (P < 0.02). Although grazing is not a primary purpose of the standard USDA-NRCS cover crop code, the stubble heights we used on cover crops seeded into a bermudagrass sod provided documentation that these grazing regimens in this humid environment were a sustainable system. The persistence, adaptation, and sustainability of bermudagrass in the Southeastern US provide additional soil cover when using winter annual cover crops.

Table 6. Effect of cover crop treatment and grazing regimen on cover crop forage accumulation during vegetative growth of cover crops for two years.

Year 1 Year 2
Treatment DM (kg/ha)
Cover crop 1
RYG 5878 a 5729 a
CLV-RYG 4479 b 5793 a
CLV 3906 b 3959 b
Stocking regimen 2
GRZ1 4665 a 4816 a
GRZ2 4626 a 5137 a
GRZ3 4973 a 5528 a

1CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; 2GRZ1 = residual stubble height of 10 - 15 cm, GRZ2 = 15 - 20 cm, GRZ3 = 20 - 30 cm; abc: Within a treatment group, values in a column with different letters differ at P < 0.0001.

Table 7. Effect of cover crop treatment and grazing regimen on total season forage accumulation including BG mass for two years.

Year 1 Year 2
Treatment DM (kg/ha)
Cover crop 1
RYG 13,407 a 16,572 a
CLV-RYG 12,866 a 16,176 a
CLV 12,765 a 14,927 a
Stocking regimen 2
GRZ1 12,390 b 13,966 e
GRZ2 13,596 a 16,572 d
GRZ3 13,052 a 17,139 d

1CLV = clover; RYG = ryegrass; CLV-RYG = clover + ryegrass; 2GRZ1 = residual stubble height of 10 - 15 cm, GRZ2 = 15 - 20 cm, GRZ3 = 20 - 30 cm; abc: Within a treatment group, values in a column with different letters differ at P < 0.003; def: Within a treatment group, values in a column with different letters differ at P < 0.023.

 Acknowledgements

Primary funding for this work was provided by Texas A&M AgriLife Research at Overton, Texas. Partial funding was provided by USDA-NRCS. The authors thank Dr. Jake Mowrer, director of the Texas AgriLife Extension Soil, Water and Forage Testing Laboratory, for his guidance in the interpretation of soils data.

 References USDA (2026) Cover Crops and Crop Rotation. https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/general-information/initiatives-and-highlighted-programs/peoples-garden/soil-health/cover-crops-and-crop-rotation 2026 Cover Crops and Crop Rotation NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) (2019) Technical Specification Cover Crop Code 340. USDA-NRCS. 2019 Technical Specification Cover Crop Code 340 Rouquette, F.M. and Smith, G.R. (2010) Review: Effects of Biological Nitrogen Fixation and Nutrient Cycling on Stocking Strategies for Cow-Calf and Stocker Programs. The Professional Animal Scientist, 26, 131-141. https://doi.org/10.15232/s1080-7446(15)30572-6 10.15232/s1080-7446(15)30572-6https://doi.org/10.15232/s1080-7446(15)30572-6 Rouquette, F.M. Smith, G.R. 2010 Review: Effects of Biological Nitrogen Fixation and Nutrient Cycling on Stocking Strategies for Cow-Calf and Stocker Programs The Professional Animal Scientist 7446 15 10.15232/s1080-7446(15)30572-6 Rouquette Jr., F.M. (2015) Grazing Systems Research and Impact of Stocking Strategies on Pasture-Animal Production Efficiencies. Crop Science, 55, 2513-2530. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2015.01.0062 10.2135/cropsci2015.01.0062https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2015.01.0062 2015 Grazing Systems Research and Impact of Stocking Strategies on Pasture-Animal Production Efficiencies Crop Science 55 10.2135/cropsci2015.01.0062 Stephens, F.L. and Marchant, W.H. (1958) The Influence of Irrigation, Rates of Nitrogen, and Interplanted Crops on Forage Production of Coastal Bermuda Grass. Circular New Series Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station: 15. Stephens, F.L. Marchant, W.H. Irrigation, R 1958 The Influence of Irrigation, Rates of Nitrogen, and Interplanted Crops on Forage Production of Coastal Bermuda Grass 15 Swain, F.G., Decker, A.M. and Retzer, H.J. (1965) Sod‐Seeding of Annual Forages into ‘Midland’ Bermudagrass ( Cynodon dactylon L.) Pastures. I. Species Evaluation. Agronomy Journal, 57, 596-598. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1965.00021962005700060024x 10.2134/agronj1965.00021962005700060024xhttps://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1965.00021962005700060024x Swain, F.G. Decker, A.M. Retzer, H.J. 1965 Sod‐Seeding of Annual Forages into ‘Midland’ Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon L ) Pastures. I. Species Evaluation. Agronomy Journal 57 10.2134/agronj1965.00021962005700060024x Sechler, D., Chapman, W.H., Robertson, W.K. and Thompson, L.G. (1966) Seeding Small Grain in Bermudagrass and Bahiagrass. Proceedings of the Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida, 26, 190-205. Sechler, D. Chapman, W.H. Robertson, W.K. Thompson, L.G. 1966 Seeding Small Grain in Bermudagrass and Bahiagrass Proceedings of the Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida 26 Welch, L.F., Wilkinson, S.R. and Hillsman, G.A. (1967) Rye Seeded for Grain in Coastal Bermudagrass. Agronomy Journal, 59, 467-471. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1967.00021962005900050026x 10.2134/agronj1967.00021962005900050026xhttps://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1967.00021962005900050026x Welch, L.F. Wilkinson, S.R. Hillsman, G.A. 1967 Rye Seeded for Grain in Coastal Bermudagrass Agronomy Journal 59 10.2134/agronj1967.00021962005900050026x Matocha, J.E. (1975) No-Till and Seedbed Production of Small Grains-Ryegrass Mixture for Forage in East Texas. Bulletin No. 1155, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas A&M University. Matocha, J.E. Station, T 1975 No-Till and Seedbed Production of Small Grains-Ryegrass Mixture for Forage in East Texas Bulletin No. 1155 Utley, P.R., Marchant, W.H. and McCormick, W.C. (1976) Evaluation of Annual Grass Forages in Prepared Seedbeds and Overseeded into Perennial Sods. Journal of Animal Science, 42, 16-20. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1976.42116x 10.2527/jas1976.42116xhttps://doi.org/10.2527/jas1976.42116x Utley, P.R. Marchant, W.H. McCormick, W.C. 1976 Evaluation of Annual Grass Forages in Prepared Seedbeds and Overseeded into Perennial Sods Journal of Animal Science 42 10.2527/jas1976.42116x Leanne Dillard, S., Hancock, D.W., Harmon, D.D., Kimberly Mullenix, M., Beck, P.A. and Soder, K.J. (2018) Animal Performance and Environmental Efficiency of Cool-and Warm-Season Annual Grazing Systems. Journal of Animal Science, 96, 3491-3502. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/sky025 10.1093/jas/sky02529566219https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/sky025 Dillard, S. Hancock, D.W. Harmon, D.D. Mullenix, M. Beck, P.A. Soder, K.J. 2018 Animal Performance and Environmental Efficiency of Cool-and Warm-Season Annual Grazing Systems Journal of Animal Science 96 10.1093/jas/sky025 29566219 Mullenix, M.K. and Rouquette, F.M. (2018) Review: Cool-Season Annual Grasses or Grass-Clover Management Options for Extending the Fall-Winter-Early Spring Grazing Season for Beef Cattle. The Professional Animal Scientist, 34, 231-239. https://doi.org/10.15232/pas.2017-01714 10.15232/pas.2017-01714https://doi.org/10.15232/pas.2017-01714 Mullenix, M.K. Rouquette, F.M. 2018 Review: Cool-Season Annual Grasses or Grass-Clover Management Options for Extending the Fall-Winter-Early Spring Grazing Season for Beef Cattle The Professional Animal Scientist 34 10.15232/pas.2017-01714 Evers, G.W., Smith, G.R. and Hoveland, C.S. (1997) Ecology and Production of Annual Ryegrass. In: Rouquette Jr., F.M. and Nelson, L.R., Eds., Ecology, Production, andManagement of Lolium for Forage in the USA, CSSA, 29-43. https://doi.org/10.2135/cssaspecpub24.c3 10.2135/cssaspecpub24.c3https://doi.org/10.2135/cssaspecpub24.c3 Evers, G.W. Smith, G.R. Hoveland, C.S. Nelson, L.R. Ecology, P USA, C 1997 Ecology and Production of Annual Ryegrass In: Rouquette Jr. 29 10.2135/cssaspecpub24.c3 Mackowiak, C.L., Dubeux, J.C.B., George, S., Wright, D.L., Blount, A.R. and Small, I. (2024) Tillage and Overseeding Pastures for Winter Forage Production in North Florida. EDIS, 2024, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-ag146-2024 10.32473/edis-ag146-2024https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-ag146-2024 Mackowiak, C.L. Dubeux, J.C.B. George, S. Wright, D.L. Blount, A.R. Small, I. 2024 Tillage and Overseeding Pastures for Winter Forage Production in North Florida EDIS 2024 10.32473/edis-ag146-2024 Rouquette Jr., F.M. (2017) Invited Review: Management Strategies for Intensive, Sustainable Cow-Calf Production Systems in the Southeastern United States: Bermudagrass Pastures Overseeded with Cool-Season Annual Grasses and Legumes. The Professional Animal Scientist, 33, 297-309. https://doi.org/10.15232/pas.2016-01591 10.15232/pas.2016-01591https://doi.org/10.15232/pas.2016-01591 Intensive, S 2017 Invited Review: Management Strategies for Intensive, Sustainable Cow-Calf Production Systems in the Southeastern United States: Bermudagrass Pastures Overseeded with Cool-Season Annual Grasses and Legumes The Professional Animal Scientist 33 10.15232/pas.2016-01591 Ball, D.M., Hoveland, C.S. and Lacefield, G.D. (2015) Overseeding Annual Ryegrass on Warm Season Pastures. Alabama Cooperative Extension System, Auburn University. Ball, D.M. Hoveland, C.S. Lacefield, G.D. System, A 2015 Overseeding Annual Ryegrass on Warm Season Pastures Alabama Cooperative Extension System NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) (2020) Conservation Practice Standard: Pasture and Hay Planting (Code 512). USDA-NRCS. 2020 Conservation Practice Standard: Pasture and Hay Planting (Code 512) NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) (2020) Practice Overview: Pasture and Hay Planting (Code 512). USDA-NRCS. 2020 Practice Overview: Pasture and Hay Planting (Code 512) NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) (2012) Conservation Practice Standard Forage and Biomass Planting (Code 512), North Carolina. USDA-NRCS. 2012 Conservation Practice Standard Forage and Biomass Planting (Code 512), North Carolina NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) (2013) Conservation Practice Standard Forage and Biomass Planting (Code 512), Wisconsin. USDA-NRCS. 2013 Conservation Practice Standard Forage and Biomass Planting (Code 512), Wisconsin NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) (2025) Enhancement E512B: Forage and Biomass Planting to Reduce Soil Erosion or Improve Water Quality. USDA-NRCS. 2025 Enhancement E512B: Forage and Biomass Planting to Reduce Soil Erosion or Improve Water Quality Soil and Plant Analysis Council Inc. (2000) Soil Analysis Handbook of Reference Methods. 1st Edition, CRC Press, 100-104. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203739433 10.1201/9780203739433https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203739433 Edition, C 2000 Soil Analysis Handbook of Reference Methods 1st Edition 100 10.1201/9780203739433 Mehlich, A. (1978) New Extractant for Soil Test Evaluation of Phosphorus, Potassium, Magnesium, Calcium, Sodium, Manganese and Zinc. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 9, 477-492. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103627809366824 10.1080/00103627809366824https://doi.org/10.1080/00103627809366824 Mehlich, A. Phosphorus, P Magnesium, C Sodium, M 1978 New Extractant for Soil Test Evaluation of Phosphorus, Potassium, Magnesium, Calcium, Sodium, Manganese and Zinc Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 9 10.1080/00103627809366824 Schofield, R.K. and Taylor, A.W. (1955) The Measurement of Soil pH. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 19, 164-167. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1955.03615995001900020013x 10.2136/sssaj1955.03615995001900020013xhttps://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1955.03615995001900020013x Schofield, R.K. Taylor, A.W. 1955 The Measurement of Soil pH Soil Science Society of America Journal 19 10.2136/sssaj1955.03615995001900020013x Rhoades, J.D. (1982) Soluble Salts. In: Page, A.L., Ed., Methods of Soil Analysis, American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America, 167-179. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c10 10.2134/agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c10https://doi.org/10.2134/agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c10 Rhoades, J.D. Page, A.L. Analysis, A Agronomy, C 1982 Soluble Salts In: Page 167 10.2134/agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c10 McGeehan, S.L. and Naylor, D.V. (1988) Automated Instrumental Analysis of Carbon and Nitrogen in Plant and Soil Samples. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 19, 493-505. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628809367953 10.1080/00103628809367953https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628809367953 McGeehan, S.L. Naylor, D.V. 1988 Automated Instrumental Analysis of Carbon and Nitrogen in Plant and Soil Samples Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 19 10.1080/00103628809367953 Schulte, E.E. and Hopkins, B.G. (1996) Estimation of Soil Organic Matter by Weight Loss-on-Ignition. In: Magdoff, F.R., Tabatabai, M.A. and Hanlon Jr., E.A., Eds., SoilOrganic Matter: Analysis and Interpretation, American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America, 21-31. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaspecpub46.c3 10.2136/sssaspecpub46.c3https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaspecpub46.c3 Schulte, E.E. Hopkins, B.G. Magdoff, F.R. Tabatabai, M.A. Interpretation, A Agronomy, C 1996 Estimation of Soil Organic Matter by Weight Loss-on-Ignition In: Magdoff 21 10.2136/sssaspecpub46.c3 Storer, D.A. (1984) A Simple High Sample Volume Ashing Procedure for Determination of Soil Organic Matter. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 15, 759-772. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628409367515 10.1080/00103628409367515https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628409367515 Storer, D.A. 1984 A Simple High Sample Volume Ashing Procedure for Determination of Soil Organic Matter Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 15 10.1080/00103628409367515 Keeney, D.R. and Nelson, D.W. (1982) Nitrogen—Inorganic Forms. In: Page, A.L., Ed., Methods of Soil Analysis: Part2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties, American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America, 643-698. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c33 10.2134/agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c33https://doi.org/10.2134/agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c33 Keeney, D.R. Nelson, D.W. Page, A.L. Properties, A Agronomy, C 1982 Nitrogen—Inorganic Forms In: Page 643 10.2134/agronmonogr9.2.2ed.c33 Kachurina, O.M., Zhang, H., Raun, W.R. and Krenzer, E.G. (2000) Simultaneous Determination of Soil Aluminum, Ammonium‐ and Nitrate‐Nitrogen Using 1 M Potassium Chloride Extraction. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 31, 893-903. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620009370485 10.1080/00103620009370485https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620009370485 Kachurina, O.M. Zhang, H. Raun, W.R. Krenzer, E.G. Aluminum, A 2000 Simultaneous Determination of Soil Aluminum, Ammonium‐ and Nitrate‐Nitrogen Using 1 M Potassium Chloride Extraction Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 31 10.1080/00103620009370485 Rouquette Jr., F.M., van Santen, E. and Smith, G.R. (2018) Long‐Term Forage and Cow-Calf Relationships for Bermudagrass Overseeded with Arrowleaf Clover or Annual Ryegrass Managed at Different Stocking Rates. Crop Science, 58, 1426-1439. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2017.12.0736 10.2135/cropsci2017.12.0736https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2017.12.0736 Santen, E. Smith, G.R. 2018 Long‐Term Forage and Cow-Calf Relationships for Bermudagrass Overseeded with Arrowleaf Clover or Annual Ryegrass Managed at Different Stocking Rates Crop Science 58 10.2135/cropsci2017.12.0736 Santos, E.R.S., Dubeux, J.C.B., Sollenberger, L.E., Mackowiak, C.L., Wright, D.L., Dilorenzo, N., et al. (2022) Grazing Management Effects on Cover Crop Responses and Cotton Lint Yield. Crop Science, 62, 2523-2536. https://doi.org/10.1002/csc2.20766 10.1002/csc2.20766https://doi.org/10.1002/csc2.20766 Santos, E.R.S. Dubeux, J.C.B. Sollenberger, L.E. Mackowiak, C.L. Wright, D.L. Dilorenzo, N. 2022 Grazing Management Effects on Cover Crop Responses and Cotton Lint Yield Crop Science 62 10.1002/csc2.20766 Dairy One Forage Lab (2025) Feed Composition Library. Dairy One, Inc. One, I 2025 Feed Composition Library Dairy One Roth, L.D., Rouquette Jr., F.M. and Ellis, W.C. (1990) Effects of Herbage Allowance on Herbage and Dietary Attributes of Coastal Bermudagrass. Journal of Animal Science, 68, 193-205. Roth, L.D. Ellis, W.C. 1990 Effects of Herbage Allowance on Herbage and Dietary Attributes of Coastal Bermudagrass Journal of Animal Science 68 SAS Institute Inc. (2023) SAS/STAT® 15.3 User’s Guide. SAS Institute Inc. 2023 SAS/STAT® 15 Evers, G. (2012) Effect of Autumn Sod Treatments on Overseeded Annual Ryegrass Production and Coastal Bermudagrass Recovery. Crop Science, 52, 1430-1436. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2011.09.0484 10.2135/cropsci2011.09.0484https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2011.09.0484 Evers, G. 2012 Effect of Autumn Sod Treatments on Overseeded Annual Ryegrass Production and Coastal Bermudagrass Recovery Crop Science 52 10.2135/cropsci2011.09.0484 Holt, E.C. and Lancaster, J.A. (1968) Yield and Stand Survival of ‘Coastal’ Bermudagrass as Influenced by Management Practices 1. Agronomy Journal, 60, 7-11. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1968.00021962006000010003x 10.2134/agronj1968.00021962006000010003xhttps://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1968.00021962006000010003x Holt, E.C. Lancaster, J.A. 1968 Yield and Stand Survival of ‘Coastal’ Bermudagrass as Influenced by Management Practices1 Agronomy Journal 60 10.2134/agronj1968.00021962006000010003x Schomberg, H.H., Fisher, D.S., Reeves, D.W., Endale, D.M., Raper, R.L., Jayaratne, K.S.U., et al. (2014) Grazing Winter Rye Cover Crop in a Cotton No‐Till System: Yield and Economics. Agronomy Journal, 106, 1041-1050. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj13.0434 10.2134/agronj13.0434https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj13.0434 Schomberg, H.H. Fisher, D.S. Reeves, D.W. Endale, D.M. Raper, R.L. Jayaratne, K.S.U. 2014 Grazing Winter Rye Cover Crop in a Cotton No‐Till System: Yield and Economics Agronomy Journal 106 10.2134/agronj13.0434 Mubvumba, P., DeLaune, P.B. and Hons, F.M. (2021) Soil Water Dynamics under a Warm-Season Cover Crop Mixture in Continuous Wheat. Soil and Tillage Research, 206, Article 104823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2020.104823 10.1016/j.still.2020.104823https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2020.104823 Mubvumba, P. DeLaune, P.B. Hons, F.M. 2021 Soil Water Dynamics under a Warm-Season Cover Crop Mixture in Continuous Wheat Soil and Tillage Research 206 104823 10.1016/j.still.2020.104823 Franzluebbers, A. and Stuedemann, J. (2008) Soil Physical Responses to Cattle Grazing Cover Crops under Conventional and No Tillage in the Southern Piedmont Usa. Soil and Tillage Research, 100, 141-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2008.05.011 10.1016/j.still.2008.05.011https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2008.05.011 Franzluebbers, A. Stuedemann, J. 2008 Soil Physical Responses to Cattle Grazing Cover Crops under Conventional and No Tillage in the Southern Piedmont Usa Soil and Tillage Research 100 10.1016/j.still.2008.05.011 Tobin, C., Singh, S., Kumar, S., Wang, T. and Sexton, P. (2020) Demonstrating Short-Term Impacts of Grazing and Cover Crops on Soil Health and Economic Benefits in an Integrated Crop-Livestock System in South Dakota. Open Journal of Soil Science, 10, 109-136. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2020.103006 10.4236/ojss.2020.103006https://doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2020.103006 Tobin, C. Singh, S. Kumar, S. Wang, T. Sexton, P. 2020 Demonstrating Short-Term Impacts of Grazing and Cover Crops on Soil Health and Economic Benefits in an Integrated Crop-Livestock System in South Dakota Open Journal of Soil Science 10 10.4236/ojss.2020.103006 Wang, Y., Duan, W., Tu, C., Washburn, S., Cheng, L. and Hu, S. (2014) Soil Carbon, Nitrogen and Microbial Dynamics of Pasturelands: Impacts of Grazing Intensity and Planting Systems. Pedosphere, 24, 408-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1002-0160(14)60027-8 10.1016/s1002-0160(14)60027-8https://doi.org/10.1016/s1002-0160(14)60027-8 Wang, Y. Duan, W. Tu, C. Washburn, S. Cheng, L. Hu, S. Carbon, N 2014 Soil Carbon, Nitrogen and Microbial Dynamics of Pasturelands: Impacts of Grazing Intensity and Planting Systems Pedosphere 0160 14 10.1016/s1002-0160(14)60027-8