[{"id":321,"date":"2026-03-16T20:57:13","date_gmt":"2026-03-16T20:57:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/?p=321"},"modified":"2026-03-16T20:57:13","modified_gmt":"2026-03-16T20:57:13","slug":"cool-season-forage-mixtures-for-winter-grazing-in-south-carolina","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/cool-season-forage-mixtures-for-winter-grazing-in-south-carolina\/","title":{"rendered":"Cool-season forage mixtures for winter grazing in South Carolina"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>By: <strong>Daniela Rodriguez, M.S. student<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Why cool-season forage diversity matters? <\/strong>In the southeastern United States, annual cool-season forages help us maintain grazing, reduce feed costs, and optimize animal performance. These forages can extend the grazing season while warm-season perennial grasses are dormant. Cool-season forage mixtures such as grasses, legumes, and brassicas, have the potential to improve forage quality and system resilience. Knowledge of the dynamic behavior of mixtures in grazing systems has specific applications in making informed grazing management decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>How did we evaluate cool-season forage mixtures at Clemson University? <\/strong>In this 2-year project, different cool-season forage mixtures were established and are being managed under rotational stocking in South Carolina (Figure 1). Forage mass and quality are being determined throughout the grazing season.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-cover\" style=\"min-height:361px;aspect-ratio:unset;\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"923\" class=\"wp-block-cover__image-background wp-image-327\" alt=\"Figure 1: Cool-Season forage paddocks under rotational stocking at EREC.\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/03\/Picture1_liliane-grad-student-3.2026-1024x923.png\" style=\"object-position:49% 67%\" data-object-fit=\"cover\" data-object-position=\"49% 67%\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/03\/Picture1_liliane-grad-student-3.2026-1024x923.png 1024w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/03\/Picture1_liliane-grad-student-3.2026-300x271.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/03\/Picture1_liliane-grad-student-3.2026-768x693.png 768w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/03\/Picture1_liliane-grad-student-3.2026.png 1119w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><span aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-cover__background has-background-dim\"><\/span><div class=\"wp-block-cover__inner-container is-layout-flow wp-block-cover-is-layout-flow\">\n<p><strong>Figure 1.<\/strong> Cool-season forage paddocks under rotational stocking at EREC.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><u>Overview of research project:<\/u><\/strong> This study is located at the Clemson University Edisto Research and Education Center (EREC) in Blackville, SC. Three cool-season forage mixtures were established in October 2024 and 2025. Beef heifers are rotationally grazing these plots from December through April each consecutive year. Treatments are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Grass mixture (Grass):<\/strong> oat, cereal rye, and annual ryegrass<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Grass\u2013legume mixture (GLEg):<\/strong> Grass + white, crimson, and red clover<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Grass\u2013legume\u2013brassica mixture (GLBr):<\/strong> Grass+ clovers, winter pea, and radish<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Forage availability and quality: <\/strong>Forage mass varied throughout the grazing season, with lower production in early winter and higher production later in the season (Figure 2). This pattern reflects the natural growth dynamics of cool-season species, which typically reach their peak production in late winter and early spring.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"817\" height=\"492\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image-2.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-322\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image-2.png 817w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image-2-300x181.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image-2-768x462.png 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 817px) 100vw, 817px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Figure 2.<\/strong> Forage mass of cool-season treatments per grazing cycle in Blackville, SC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The nutritional value of the forage was influenced by both the species and the maturity of the plants throughout the season; mixtures including legumes and brassicas tended to maintain higher crude protein concentrations at the beginning of the grazing period, which helps meet the nutritional needs of the animals during early winter grazing. Forage quality declined later in the season as the plants mature, with an increase in fiber concentration and a decrease in crude protein concentration. Accordingly, it is important to adjust the timing of grazing to the growth stage of the forage to maximize nutritional benefits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><u>Take-home message:<\/u><\/strong> Cool-season forage mixtures are a valuable tool for extending the grazing season in the region. While forage production depends mainly on seasonal growth patterns, the nutritional value of the forage is closely related to the species used and their stage of maturity. Using these mixtures during the cool season can provide opportunities for early grazing, maintain forage quality, and contribute to more resilient livestock production systems.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>By: Daniela Rodriguez, M.S. student Why cool-season forage diversity matters? In the southeastern United States, annual cool-season forages help us maintain grazing, reduce feed costs, and optimize animal performance. These forages can extend the grazing season while warm-season perennial grasses are dormant. Cool-season forage mixtures such as grasses, legumes, and brassicas, have the potential to [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3929,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[41471,1],"tags":[],"coauthors":[116884],"class_list":["post-321","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cool-season-forages","category-uncategorized"],"fimg_url":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/321","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3929"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=321"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/321\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=321"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=321"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=321"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=321"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":324,"date":"2026-03-16T20:33:09","date_gmt":"2026-03-16T20:33:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/?p=324"},"modified":"2026-03-16T20:41:44","modified_gmt":"2026-03-16T20:41:44","slug":"april-showers-and-spring-pasture-management-for-south-carolina-beef-producers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/april-showers-and-spring-pasture-management-for-south-carolina-beef-producers\/","title":{"rendered":"April Showers and Spring Pasture Management for South Carolina Beef Producers"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Authors: Amber Starnes, SCCA Executive Director\/L&amp;F Area Agent and Lee Van Vlake, CUCES Livestock and Forages Program Team Director\/L&amp;F Area Agent<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Many of us are familiar with the old saying, <em>\u201cApril showers bring May flowers.\u201d<\/em> While this is true, what the saying doesn\u2019t mention is the mud, soggy pastures, and potential soil damage that those April showers often bring to livestock operations. Coming off winter, pastures may need extra attention and care to ensure a productive spring grazing season.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Assessing Pastures After Winter<\/strong><br>Even with the increasing popularity of rotational grazing among South Carolina producers, it\u2019s important to assess soil health and forage conditions before turning cattle out in spring. Winter can take a toll on pastures, leaving bare spots, compaction, or weak forage stands that require management.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Using Sacrifice Areas to Protect Pastures<\/strong><br>One effective strategy is the use of a sacrifice area within a rotational grazing system. This should be a small, well-drained paddock that contains livestock during periods of wet, muddy conditions. By keeping animals off soggy fields, you can protect soil structure, prevent compaction, and reduce damage to emerging forage. Protecting the soil now sets the stage for a healthy and productive pasture later in the season.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Controlling Traffic and Feeding Areas<\/strong><br>Another important consideration is <strong>animal traffic around feeders and water sources<\/strong>. Heavy traffic in these areas can quickly create deep mud and compacted soil. To reduce damage, <strong>move <\/strong><strong>feeders frequently<\/strong> or place them on <strong>heavy-use pads<\/strong> to protect the soil and maintain pasture health. Minimizing concentrated traffic areas also helps forage recover faster and prevents erosion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Managing Weeds and Bare Spots<\/strong><br>Wet Spring conditions also create ideal environments for weeds to invade pastures. Bare spots, combined with high moisture, can quickly become weed-prone areas. Early pasture scouting is key to controlling these unwanted plants before they take over. Consider seeding or sprigging bare areas in early spring to encourage growth of desirable forage. When renovating pastures, the no-till method is recommended, especially during wet periods, to maintain soil structure and prevent erosion. Take note of poorly drained areas that may need longer-term solutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Soil Fertility: A Key to Success<\/strong><br>Healthy pastures starts with healthy soil. Conducting soil tests early in the spring allows you to identify nutrient needs and plan fertilizer applications effectively. Avoid applying fertilizer during heavy rain, as nutrients can be washed away or leach into waterways, reducing effectiveness and potentially harming the environment. Follow soil test recommendations to ensure proper rates of lime, phosphorus, potassium, and other nutrients for optimal forage growth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Looking Ahead<\/strong><br>Spring pasture management is not just about surviving April showers\u2014it\u2019s about setting up your pastures for long-term success. By protecting soil structure, controlling weeds, addressing bare spots, and managing fertility, producers can ensure their pastures are productive, resilient, and ready to support their herd throughout the growing season.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Wet, muddy pasture<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3929,"featured_media":325,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[13289],"tags":[],"coauthors":[116884],"class_list":["post-324","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cattle"],"fimg_url":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/03\/wet.mud-pasture-150x150.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3929"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=324"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/325"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=324"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=324"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=324"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=324"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":317,"date":"2026-02-09T22:07:12","date_gmt":"2026-02-09T22:07:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/?p=317"},"modified":"2026-02-09T22:07:12","modified_gmt":"2026-02-09T22:07:12","slug":"insights-from-the-2026-january-cattle-inventory-report","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/insights-from-the-2026-january-cattle-inventory-report\/","title":{"rendered":"Insights from the 2026 January Cattle Inventory Report"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<details class=\"wp-block-details is-layout-flow wp-block-details-is-layout-flow\"><summary>By: Matthew Fischer, Clemson Extension Livestock and Forage Economist, and Brian Beer, Clemson Extension Area Livestock and Forage Agent<\/summary>\n<p>The 2026 January Cattle Inventory Report was released by the National Agriculture Statistics Service (NASS) on January 30, 2026. Below are some insights from the report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>United States:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As of January 1, 2026, the US cattle inventory totaled 86.2 million head, slightly lower than the January 2025 inventory of 86.5 million head (See Figure 1). The reduction continues the downward trend in cattle inventory that started after 2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>&nbsp; <strong>Figure 1:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"924\" height=\"544\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-318\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image.png 924w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image-300x177.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image-768x452.png 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 924px) 100vw, 924px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (Source: USDA, NASS)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Cows and heifers that have calved totaled 37.2 million head, a relatively flat movement from the 37.3 million head on January 1, 2025. Beef cows were down 1% from 2025 at 27.6 million head. Beef cow replacements were up 1% in 2026 at 4.71 million head. This is the first increase in beef replacement inventory since the January 2021 Inventory Report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Cattle over 500 lbs. varied. &nbsp;Heifers over 500 lbs. were 18 million head, down 1%.&nbsp; Beef replacement heifers were 4.71 million in 2026, up 1% from 2025.&nbsp; Steers over 500 lbs. were reported at 15.6 million, down 1%. Bulls over 500 lbs. were 2.01 million head, up less than 1% from 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The 2025 calf crop was down 2% from 2024, estimated at 32.9 million head.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Dairy cow inventory was up 2% in 2026, reported at 9.68 million head.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>South Carolina Inventory:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>South Carolina\u2019s cattle and calves inventory reported a 5% reduction from 2025.&nbsp; All cattle and calves\u2019 inventory on January 31, 2026, was reported at 280,000, down 15,000 head from 2025.&nbsp; All cows and heifers that have calved were down 4% at 147,000 head, and South Carolina\u2019s calf crop was 7% lower at 125,000 head. USDA did not provide inventory data for beef cows that have calved for South Carolina in the 2026 inventory report. The reduction in 2026 follows the slight increases in inventory and calf crop that South Carolina reported in 2025. &nbsp;&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>South Carolina marketing seasonality has continued to not follow expectations.&nbsp; The one exception with volume decreasing towards the end of each year. Expected depressed volume has continued due to contraction in the herd size.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Figure 2. Cattle Marketing Volume Seasonality<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"938\" height=\"486\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image-1.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-319\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image-1.png 938w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image-1-300x155.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2026\/02\/image-1-768x398.png 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 938px) 100vw, 938px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Takeaways:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The missing inventory number in the beef replacement category is frustrating. Given the inventory reductions across the reported categories, it is reasonable to speculate that the beef cow replacement inventory is also down (or at least not increasing). We just don\u2019t know due to the missing data. Compared to other southern region states, Alabama and Florida saw cattle inventory increase (2% and 1% respectively), while Georgia and Tennessee are both down 1%. Virginia\u2019s 2026 inventory was unchanged from 2025<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The national market could be slowing down on liquidation. Is the 2026 cattle inventory less than 1% lower than last year, coupled with the increase in beef replacements, signaling an end to the liquidation phase of the cattle cycle? Maybe so; however, we still have a 75-year low in cattle inventory, and the year-over-year reduction in the calf crop may not sustain heifer retention in the coming years. An indicator moving forward can be the Cattle on Feed Reports and observing the portion of heifers that are on feed.&nbsp; Regardless, for the foreseeable future there are still fewer hooves on the ground than last year to supply the beef market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>You may review the 2026 January Cattle Inventory Report in its entirety at: &nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/esmis.nal.usda.gov\/sites\/default\/release-files\/795748\/catl0126.pdf\">https:\/\/esmis.nal.usda.gov\/sites\/default\/release-files\/795748\/catl0126.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n<\/details>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":3929,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4930,13289],"tags":[],"coauthors":[116884],"class_list":["post-317","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-agribusiness","category-cattle"],"fimg_url":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/317","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3929"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=317"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/317\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=317"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=317"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=317"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=317"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":311,"date":"2025-08-05T18:34:43","date_gmt":"2025-08-05T18:34:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/?p=311"},"modified":"2025-08-06T18:05:58","modified_gmt":"2025-08-06T18:05:58","slug":"fall-armyworm-management-for-pastures-and-hayfields","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/fall-armyworm-management-for-pastures-and-hayfields\/","title":{"rendered":"Fall Armyworm Management for Pastures and Hayfields"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Authors: Amber Starnes, Brian Beer, Lee Van Vlake, Dr. Liliane Silva<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It is time for hay and livestock producers to consider the prevention and control of fall armyworms in pastures and hayfields. The fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda, is known as a chronic pest in the Southeast region of the US. Climates in South Carolina and North Carolina favor their development due to hot, dry summers being typical. Generally, fall armyworms are most numerous in late summer and early fall, but in some years, they can start occurring in late June. The caterpillars feed on a variety of forage crops, such as bahiagrass, bermudagrass, pearl millet, and sorghum, but the most damage is usually seen in lush, green forage stands.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Fall armyworms are susceptible to cold, making late summer\/early fall prime time for their development, which means this is also the prime time to prepare for the prevention and control of an invasion. Often, this pest is present but goes undetected because of the initial small size of the larvae. Mature caterpillars cause the most damage because of the vast amount of foliage they consume, and damage may often appear overnight. Damage varies in appearance and severity according to the length of time that the caterpillars were feeding, but also with some visual distinctions regarding the type of grass and management practices used. In a pasture situation where the grass has been overgrazed, the grass may seem to thin out and develop brown spots. All tender green material may be removed in hayfields, leaving only tough stems a few inches long. Established, healthy bermudagrass is rarely killed by a single infestation of armyworms. Still, the complete defoliation caused by severe infestation weakens plants and deprives livestock of pasture or a hay producer of hay cutting. Fall armyworm damage on newly established forages can be a more severe situation. The crops can be severely stunted or killed if fall armyworms feed too far down on these plants. Most commonly, fall armyworms forage during early morning and late afternoon, when temperatures cool down, making this the recommended time to scout the fields for the pest or signs of damage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Scouting hayfields and pastures should begin in June. While scouting, the following descriptions are stages of the fall armyworm that you may notice. Fall armyworm eggs are creamy-white and dome-shaped with a flat base. Eggs are laid in clusters of 25 to 100, with a single adult female moth laying as many as 2,000 eggs on lower leaf blades. The egg clusters will have a hairy\/fuzzy appearance. The newly hatched larvae are light green to cream-colored with a dark head capsule. The newly hatched larvae are tiny and often go unnoticed. As the larvae develop, they become darker with light-colored lines down the side of the body. The head capsule will be dark with a light-colored inverted Y marking on the front. Another identifying mark will be the four dots on the next-to-last abdominal segment. Once fully grown, the larva measures about 1 \u00bd inch long.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Large armyworms frequently disappear almost as suddenly as they appeared, either burrowing into the ground to pupate or migrating in search of food. The adult fall armyworm is an ash-gray moth with a 1 \u00bd inch wingspan. It will have whitish spots near the tip of the front wings, and the hind wings are whitish with narrow brownish wing edges. With the rapid rate of development of the fall armyworms during late summer\/early fall, it is not uncommon to get 5 or more generations produced each year. Generations can overlap, but most of the fall armyworms in one area will be similar in life stage development, making damage seem to come in waves that follow the cyclic development of the fall armyworms. Some signs that indicate fall armyworms are cattle egrets and\/or geese feeding in concentrated areas, foliage that has been chewed on the underside only, and forage that appears to be \u2018frosted.\u2019 Once damage becomes more severe, the field will have dead spots appear. It also pays to notice the condition of your neighboring fields, in that this pest will sometimes invade an area in search of food once an adjacent field has been defoliated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Scouting pastures and hayfields can help detect fall armyworm infestation before it causes economic damage. If fields are already damaged from fall armyworms, these fields should be closely monitored to determine if control is necessary at that time and for the rest of the season. If a pasture or hayfield has been heavily damaged, fertilize as recommended to allow for growth to occur, whereas a severely damaged field may need to be rested.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If you detect fall armyworms, there are certain insecticides that are labeled for pastures and hayfields that can be used for treatment. The decision to control fall armyworms is determined by the threshold for control and the stage of the fall armyworms. A population of 2-3 or more fall armyworms per square foot is a reasonable treatment threshold. As with other pests, timing is essential. Apply insecticides early or late in the day because fall armyworm larvae are most active at these times. Below is a link with insecticides labeled for fall armyworms. As always, read the label before use to ensure proper precautions are taken, such as any grazing or haying restrictions, and to ensure the product will treat the intended target. Pay attention to the residual activity of the products labeled for use and prefer those with high residual activity. Remember that multiple generations of fall armyworms may be developing in an area simultaneously (adults, larvae, eggs), and their life cycle is about 3 weeks from hatching to pupating. A second insecticide application to the same field may be needed 7-10 days after it was first treated, depending on the level of infestation and the control achieved after the first application was conducted. Always evaluate the effectiveness of the first application control to determine if a second may be necessary; remember that, depending on the level of damage caused to the plants, it can compromise the plant&#8217;s ability to regrow and persist in a field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For specific recommendations and further assistance, please contact your local Livestock and Forages. More information can be found at: https:\/\/www.clemson.edu\/extension\/agronomy\/pestmanagement21\/2021pmhpastureinsectcontrol.pdf<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Sources:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Loftin, K., Lorenz, G., Corder, R. Managing armyworms in pastures and hayfields. FSA #7083. University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension. Accessed May 2025. Available at: https:\/\/www.uaex.uada.edu\/publications\/pdf\/fsa-7083.pdf<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Marshall, M. et al. 2021 South Carolina Pest Management Handbook. Clemson University Cooperative Extension.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Authors: Amber Starnes, Brian Beer, Lee Van Vlake, Dr. Liliane Silva It is time for hay and livestock producers to consider the prevention and control of fall armyworms in pastures and hayfields. The fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda, is known as a chronic pest in the Southeast region of the US. Climates in South Carolina and [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3929,"featured_media":312,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[41471],"tags":[],"coauthors":[116884],"class_list":["post-311","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cool-season-forages"],"fimg_url":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2025\/08\/fall-armyworm-150x150.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/311","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3929"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=311"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/311\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/312"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=311"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=311"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=311"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=311"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":305,"date":"2025-04-21T13:18:49","date_gmt":"2025-04-21T13:18:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/?p=305"},"modified":"2025-04-21T13:18:49","modified_gmt":"2025-04-21T13:18:49","slug":"clemson-bull-test-sale-recap-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/clemson-bull-test-sale-recap-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Clemson Bull Test Sale Recap &#8211; 2025"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>Submitted by: Lindsey Craig, Director of Livestock Improvement<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The 49<sup>th<\/sup> Annual Clemson Extension Bull Test Sale was held February 1<sup>st<\/sup>, 2025, at the T. Ed Garrison Arena. The sale was one for the record books. We had our highest average ever at $6,975. We sold 51 bulls for a total of $355,750 in sales. The sale ring was packed with bidders and the online and phone bids were major contributors to the success of the sale. This year\u2019s set of bulls were some of the most complete, industry leading bulls that we have ever had. We sold bulls with the help of DV Auction who handled our online bidding and we had bidders from all across the country. Bidders were from South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Nebraska, Iowa, Tennessee. Bulls went home to South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Iowa.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Our highest selling bull was lot 26, an angus bull consigned by Berry Wells Farm (Johnathon Wells) from Rayle, Georgia. Mr. Frank Howey from Ruby SC bought the bull for $24,500. This was one of 5 bulls Mr. Howey bought on the day. Lot 26 was a true standout in this year\u2019s test. He took home awards for highest ADG at 6.7lbs, WDA at 4.23 lbs and Highest Index at 185.4. Bull 26 was an Elite bull with 4 EPDs in the top 1% of the breed with another 3 EPDs in the top 2% for the breed. He weighed off test at an impressive 1782lbs and was over 2100lbs on sale day.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Our second highest bull was lot 70 a SimAngus bulls consigned by Owens Family Farm, Steve Owens from Whitaker, NC. Mr. Frank Howey also bought bull 70 for $13,000. The striking looking bull with a blaze face had another set of impressive EPDs and was another Elite bull for our program. Lot 70 had several growth traits in the top 5% or higher of the breed and had a negative RFI meaning he will add efficient weight to his offspring.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Our third highest selling bull was lot 23, an angus bull from Allgood Angus, Jamie Allgood, from Athens, GA.&nbsp; Mr. Frank Howey again purchased this bull for $12,000. Bull 23 was another Elite bull with outstanding EPDs several of which were in the top 10% or better for the breed. Lot 23 was another negative RFI bull so his efficiency and growth characteristics are going to be beneficial traits to pass down to his offspring.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Our breed averages are as follows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Angus average: $7482 (28 Angus bulls sold)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Red Angus Average: $4,666 (3 Red Angus bulls sold)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Hereford Average: $5656 (8 Hereford bulls sold)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Simmental Average: $7250 (3 Simmental bulls sold)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>SimAngus Average: $7785 (7 SimAngus bulls sold)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Balancer Average: $5250 (1 Balancer bull sold)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Ultrablack Average: $5500 (1 Ultrablack bull sold)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Once again, on behalf of Clemson University, the Cooperative Extension Service as well as the Clemson Bull Test program, we thank our consignors, buyer\u2019s and bidders for their dedication in breed improvement and excellence in genetic advancement within the beef industry! The confidence each of you has in the Clemson Bull Testing Program is humbling and appreciated.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The 49<sup>th<\/sup> Annual Sale was sold by Col. Dale Stith of Mays Lick, Kentucky. Ring men were Mr. Paul Wall of Athens GA, Mr. Michael Ryan of Townville SC and Mr. David Gazda of the American Angus Association. These four gentlemen are true professionals, and we thank them for a job well done. With all the sale enthusiasm these guys never missed a bid. Thank you, gentlemen! Please mark your calendars for the first Saturday in February 2026 for another powerful offering of industry improving bulls.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Submitted by: Lindsey Craig, Director of Livestock Improvement The 49th Annual Clemson Extension Bull Test Sale was held February 1st, 2025, at the T. Ed Garrison Arena. The sale was one for the record books. We had our highest average ever at $6,975. We sold 51 bulls for a total of $355,750 in sales. The [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3929,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"coauthors":[116884],"class_list":["post-305","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"fimg_url":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/305","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3929"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=305"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/305\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=305"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=305"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=305"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=305"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":301,"date":"2025-02-04T18:27:49","date_gmt":"2025-02-04T18:27:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/?p=301"},"modified":"2025-02-04T18:36:26","modified_gmt":"2025-02-04T18:36:26","slug":"insights-from-the-2025-january-cattle-inventory-report","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/insights-from-the-2025-january-cattle-inventory-report\/","title":{"rendered":"Insights from the 2025 January Cattle Inventory Report"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>By: Matthew Fischer, Clemson Extension Livestock and Forage Economist, and Brian Beer, Clemson Extension Area Livestock and Forage Agent<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The 2025 January Cattle Inventory Report was released by the National Agriculture Statistics Service (NASS) on January 31, 2025. Below are some insights from the report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>United States:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As of January 1, 2025, the US cattle inventory totaled 86.7 million head, 1 percent lower than the January 2024 inventory of 87.2 million head (See Figure 1). The reduction continues the downward trend in cattle inventory that started after 2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>&nbsp; <strong>Figure 1:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"763\" height=\"439\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2025\/02\/beer.fischer-2.4.25-image.png\" alt=\"Figure 1: United States. All Cattle and Calves Inventory. January 1, 2025 (graph)\" class=\"wp-image-302\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2025\/02\/beer.fischer-2.4.25-image.png 763w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2025\/02\/beer.fischer-2.4.25-image-300x173.png 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 763px) 100vw, 763px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (Source: USDA, NASS)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Cows and heifers that have calved totaled 37.2 million head, a relatively flat movement from the 37.4 million head on January 1, 2024. Beef cows were down 1% from 2024 at 27.9 million head. Beef cow replacements were 1% lower in 2025 at 4.67 million head.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Feeder cattle over 500 lbs. all reported 1% lower inventory from 2024.&nbsp; Heifers (500 lbs. and over) were 18.2 million head.&nbsp; Beef replacement heifers were 4.67 million in 2025, down 1% from 2024.&nbsp; Steers were reported at 15.8 million, and bulls were 2.01 million head.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>South Carolina:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>South Carolina\u2019s cattle and calves inventory expanded in 2025 from 2024.&nbsp; Total cattle and calves\u2019 inventory on January 31, 2025, was reported at 295,000, up 2% from 2024.&nbsp; Cow inventory increased in 2025 by 1%, from 156,000 to 157,000.&nbsp; All cows and heifers that have calved were 1% higher at 157,000 head, and South Carolina\u2019s calf crop was 1% higher at 134,000 head. Historically, beef cows that have calved have comprised 94-95% of all cows and heifers that have calved. Using that historical percentage would place 2025 beef cows that have calved at 149,000 head, barely 1% higher than 2024. Unfortunately, USDA did not provide inventory on any other category.&nbsp; Leaving speculation where the missing 4,000 head would be categorized, hopefully in unreported heifer inventory. Regardless, we must be careful signaling expansion.&nbsp; South Carolina reported inventory expansion in 2023, only to follow a liquidation trend in 2024.&nbsp; Will have to wait and see. &nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Takeaways:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The missing inventory number in the beef replacement category is frustrating. One of the early indicators of the transition from herd liquidation to herd expansion is the number of beef cow replacements. Nationally, cattle liquidation is still taking place. Regionally, we just don\u2019t know due to the missing data. It isn\u2019t unreasonable to conclude that South Carolina\u2019s beef replacement inventory is higher in 2025, but that is speculation. The additional 4,000 head could be beef replacements, milk cow replacements, cows that have calved (beef or milk cows), steers or bulls over 500 pounds, or calves under 500 pounds. Without those categories in the report, we don\u2019t know where increase occurred.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The national market could be slowing down on liquidation, with all reported categories reporting a 1% or less reduction in inventory.&nbsp; This still leaves fewer hooves on the ground to supply the beef market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>You may review the 2025 January Cattle Inventory Report in its entirety at: &nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu\/usda-esmis\/files\/h702q636h\/sf26b275x\/h989sz55j\/catl0125.pdf\">https:\/\/downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu\/usda-esmis\/files\/h702q636h\/sf26b275x\/h989sz55j\/catl0125.pdf<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>By: Matthew Fischer, Clemson Extension Livestock and Forage Economist, and Brian Beer, Clemson Extension Area Livestock and Forage Agent The 2025 January Cattle Inventory Report was released by the National Agriculture Statistics Service (NASS) on January 31, 2025. Below are some insights from the report. United States: As of January 1, 2025, the US cattle [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3929,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[13289],"tags":[116886],"coauthors":[116884],"class_list":["post-301","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cattle","tag-agribusiness"],"fimg_url":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/301","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3929"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=301"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/301\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=301"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=301"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=301"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=301"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":295,"date":"2024-08-21T15:19:56","date_gmt":"2024-08-21T15:19:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/?p=295"},"modified":"2024-08-21T15:19:56","modified_gmt":"2024-08-21T15:19:56","slug":"implementation-basics-for-incorporation-of-forages-and-livestock-into-silvopasture-ecosystems","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/implementation-basics-for-incorporation-of-forages-and-livestock-into-silvopasture-ecosystems\/","title":{"rendered":"Implementation basics for incorporation of forages and livestock into silvopasture ecosystems"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Submitted by:\u00a0Liliane Silva, CUCES Forage Specialist and Janet Steele, CUCES Forestry and Wildlife Resources Agent<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>Site selection is crucial. Suitable sites for establishing silvopasture systems should be determined on criteria considering topography, soil type, drainage, and level of management needed and skills. Moreover, the availability of sunlight, water, fencing, nutrient levels, soil pH, and other resources required for tree and forage growth, and livestock management, etc.<\/li><li>Soil sampling is required before implementation. Soil samples should be collected and sent for analysis by the Clemson Agricultural Laboratory. The recommendation is to sample around 5 acres per composite sample and send it to the laboratory to get a better initial assessment of the soil&#8217;s chemical characteristics.<\/li><li>Land preparation &#8211;Tree thinning. You will need to seek out proper help from the Clemson Extension Forestry team to help with thinning considerations and recommendations. A general rule of thumb is to have a residual basal area of 40-60 ft2\/acre when establishing the forage species in the understory (Figure 1). Exceeding the recommended basal area may impact the forage establishment and compromise growth, leading to failure of establishment or persistence later on due to limited sunlight availability.\u00a0<ul><li>Proper land preparation prior to planting is key. Determine if burning is needed, which should be conducted by mid-March to remove a thicker layer of dead material and vegetation standing in the field. Once the field is burned, conduct an assessment to determine if the burning was effective in removing most of the vegetation. If weeds start to germinate, you will need to identify them and use the correct herbicides to promote control prior to planting.<\/li><li>Equipment calibration, seed depth, seed-soil contact and seeding rates. Calibrate your equipment to use the proper calibration for seeding rate and seed depth. These are some of the most common reasons for failure of establishment in any crop, and it is crucial to be conducted prior to planting any crops. Seed-soil contact is essential, so make sure that you will conduct proper preparation to achieve it.<\/li><\/ul><\/li><li>Forage crop establishment. Prepare the area by removing any existing vegetation and debris. Conduct a soil test to determine soil pH and nutrient levels and apply lime\/amendments as needed. Conduct proper weed control prior to planting, as needed.<\/li><li>Fertility management. After sowing, fertilizer will be applied according to recommendations.<\/li><li>Weed control. More information will be provided soon for post-establishment management. For pre-establishment, non-selective herbicides should be used to kill all weeds prior to sowing seeds.<\/li><li>Livestock integration. Livestock will start grazing only in Year 2 or later depending on what forages you are establishing and whether you just planted the trees or not.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\"><figure class=\"aligncenter\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"300\" height=\"250\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/fig-1-silvopasture.steele.silva_-2-300x250.png\" alt=\"Figure 1: Silvopasture System. Credits: Janet Steele\" class=\"wp-image-297\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/fig-1-silvopasture.steele.silva_-2-300x250.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/fig-1-silvopasture.steele.silva_-2-768x640.png 768w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/fig-1-silvopasture.steele.silva_-2-1024x853.png 1024w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/fig-1-silvopasture.steele.silva_-2.png 1183w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/figure><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Submitted by:\u00a0Liliane Silva, CUCES Forage Specialist and Janet Steele, CUCES Forestry and Wildlife Resources Agent Site selection is crucial. Suitable sites for establishing silvopasture systems should be determined on criteria considering topography, soil type, drainage, and level of management needed and skills. Moreover, the availability of sunlight, water, fencing, nutrient levels, soil pH, and other [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3929,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[41471,1],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-295","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cool-season-forages","category-uncategorized"],"fimg_url":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/295","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3929"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=295"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/295\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=295"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=295"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=295"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=295"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":292,"date":"2024-08-08T20:05:56","date_gmt":"2024-08-08T20:05:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/?p=292"},"modified":"2024-08-08T20:10:20","modified_gmt":"2024-08-08T20:10:20","slug":"silvopasture-systems-an-overview-of-components-and-establishment-of-woodland-systems","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/silvopasture-systems-an-overview-of-components-and-establishment-of-woodland-systems\/","title":{"rendered":"Silvopasture systems: an overview of components and establishment of woodland systems"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>Submitted by: <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Janet Steele, CUCES\u00a0<br \/><strong>Liliane Silva, CU Assistant Professor and CUCES Forages Specialist<\/strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Silvopasture is a system that integrates forage, livestock, and trees (Figure 1). <\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"853\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/fig-1-silvopasture.steele.silva_-1024x853.png\" alt=\"Figure 1: Silvopasture system.\" class=\"wp-image-293\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/fig-1-silvopasture.steele.silva_-1024x853.png 1024w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/fig-1-silvopasture.steele.silva_-300x250.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/fig-1-silvopasture.steele.silva_-768x640.png 768w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/fig-1-silvopasture.steele.silva_.png 1183w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>It is an old practice that is increasing due to the potential agronomic, environmental, economic, and social benefits that silvopasture systems can offer. These benefits include but are not limited to, increased biodiversity, soil health and livestock responses, enhanced aesthetics, and diversification of income for farmers. <br \/>Silvopasture systems can be created either by thinning existing timber stands or by <br \/>planting trees in existing pasture or in newly established areas. In this context, the choice of forage should be considered based on local climate and topography conditions, soil type, and operation goals, among others. Establishing a silvopasture system requires proper planning and understanding of the needs and requirements of each component of the system (forage, livestock, tree) and their interrelationships with the ecosystem as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Establishment of Woodland Component<\/strong><br \/>The forestry component of silvopasture can be established through two methods: <strong>planting a new stand or managing an existing stand<\/strong>. New stand establishment can occur on fallow agricultural land, hay fields or pastures, and cutover timberland. A primary consideration for these different sites is the mechanical or chemical preparation treatments required before tree planting. These may include:<br \/>\u2022 Pastures and Hayfields \u2013 Scalping of improved forage grasses<br \/>\u2022 Agricultural Fields \u2013 Ripping or subsoiling of plow pan\/hardpan<br \/>\u2022 All Sites \u2013 Herbicide applications to control competition (grasses, broad leaf weeds, and woody and shrubby vegetation on cutovers)<br \/>Another pre-establishment consideration is soil pH, which may need to be adjusted for the tree species selected (optimum of 5-5.5 for longleaf and up to 6.0 for loblolly). Finally, residual chemicals used for crop production may require that an agricultural site be laid out up to 1 year before planting tree seedlings. <br \/>Most silvopasture systems in the southeast utilize pine species. In South Carolina, this is most often longleaf or loblolly pine. The planting design can be done using two methods. The first is a double row of trees with a forage alley between rows. Tree seedlings are planted at 8&#8242; to 10&#8242; between rows and 4&#8242; to 8&#8242; between trees within rows with 30 to 40-foot alley between the sets of rows. This design results in 200 to 400 trees per acre. Planting in an east-west direction maximizes sunlight on forage strips. The other planting option is a wide block planting [ex. 12&#8242; by 12&#8242; spacing to establish 300 trees per acre]. This design limits the producer&#8217;s ability to harvest hay. Genetically improved tree seedlings developed for fewer limbs and improved stem form should be considered for this planting option. Livestock should be excluded from new stands for the first 3 to 6 years. The terminal buds need to be above browsing height, and the trees sturdy enough to withstand rubbing and trampling before animals are introduced. <br \/>The other method for establishing the tree component in silvopasture is to manage an existing timber stand. Reducing the stand density through thinning to the desired density based on the sunlight needed for successful forage establishment and production is often required. If the stand is being thinned for the first time, this is traditionally a 3rd or 4th row thinning, with additional removals within the residual rows. A professional forester should mark subsequent thinnings to ensure residual crop trees with the best timber quality will be left while meeting stand density requirements. Depending on the producer&#8217;s selected forage, a residual basal area of 40-60 ft2\/acre is usually recommended.<br \/>Management of the tree component in a silvopasture system can include prescribed burning to reduce hazardous fuels, improve forages for livestock and wildlife species, and prune lower limbs. Mechanical pruning is a labor-intensive management activity required to maintain stem quality on crop trees and create knot-free wood. Widely spaced trees and those sides of trees exposed to sunlight will develop more and larger limbs. Pruning also raises the canopy to allow more sunlight to reach the forages. Finally, herbaceous weed control is often required in the understory of the timber to enhance forage production.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Submitted by: Janet Steele, CUCES\u00a0Liliane Silva, CU Assistant Professor and CUCES Forages Specialist Silvopasture is a system that integrates forage, livestock, and trees (Figure 1). It is an old practice that is increasing due to the potential agronomic, environmental, economic, and social benefits that silvopasture systems can offer. These benefits include but are not limited [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3929,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-292","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"fimg_url":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/292","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3929"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=292"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/292\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=292"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=292"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=292"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=292"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":289,"date":"2024-08-08T19:12:13","date_gmt":"2024-08-08T19:12:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/?p=289"},"modified":"2024-08-08T20:29:21","modified_gmt":"2024-08-08T20:29:21","slug":"soil-fertility-in-forage-systems","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/soil-fertility-in-forage-systems\/","title":{"rendered":"Soil Fertility in Forage Systems"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>Submitted by:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Leo Vieira-Filho, Postdoctoral Fellow<\/strong><br \/><strong>Liliane Silva, CU Assistant Professor and CUCES Forages Specialist<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Soil Fertility Assessment = Soil Test!<br \/>Soil fertility is \u201cthe quality of a soil that enables it to provide nutrients in adequate amounts and in proper balance for the growth of specified plants when other growth factors, such as light, moisture, temperature, and the physical condition of the soil, are favorable\u201d (USDA, 2024). The soil fertility level is assessed by a soil test. The first result that should be checked in a soil test report is soil pH. Most forages require soil pH between 5.5 and 6.5; however, it is always important to remember that certain forages (e.g., legumes) require higher soil pH. Acidic soils (pH &lt; 5.5) can hold macronutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium and sulfur) and make them unavailable for plants (Figure 1).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"652\" height=\"1024\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/pH-image.silva_-652x1024.png\" alt=\"Figure 1: Nutrient availability for plants as affected by soil\" class=\"wp-image-290\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/pH-image.silva_-652x1024.png 652w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/pH-image.silva_-191x300.png 191w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/pH-image.silva_-768x1206.png 768w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/pH-image.silva_.png 1293w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 652px) 100vw, 652px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p> On the other hand, an alkaline soil can hold micronutrients (e.g., zinc, iron, manganese, boron, copper) and have the same effect. When plants do not have access to proper nutrient levels, that limits their production, quality and even persistence over time (Figure 2).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"604\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/soil-pH-image.silva_-1024x604.png\" alt=\"Figure 2: Plant growth as affected by soil pH.\" class=\"wp-image-291\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/soil-pH-image.silva_-1024x604.png 1024w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/soil-pH-image.silva_-300x177.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/08\/soil-pH-image.silva_-768x453.png 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>It is important to ensure that the soil test will correctly represent the fertility of a certain field, therefore, a representative soil sampling must be done. In order to collect a representative composite soil sample, there are some considerations to make:<br \/>\u2022 Collect a composite sample per area: a composite sample consists of combining all the soil cores (ideally 15 to 20) taken from a certain area into one sample. By collecting a composite soil sample, it will be possible to have a sample that will represent the average pH and nutrient availability. <br \/>\u2022 Size of the area sampled: the area should not be larger than 10 acres. In case of larger areas, the variability in soil characteristics will likely be high. Therefore, only one composite sample will not be enough to correctly detect differences in pH and nutrient availability across the whole area. <br \/>\u2022 Sources of variability: topography, management history, fertilization history, land use history, etc. It may be necessary to collect separate composite samples for different fields depending on those factors previously mentioned.<br \/>\u2022 Proper soil depth: should be taken into consideration based on the forage species used when establishing a new field. Consider sampling a depth of 8 in when establishing a new forage (forage roots normally explore more than 4 in of soil). For well established fields, sampling to 6 in should be enough, unless you have a forage stand that requires deeper routine sampling (e.g., alfalfa stand).<br \/>\u2022 Be careful with contamination of soil from other fields or other sources: do not use dirt or rusted buckets, buckets that you transport fertilizer or minerals for animals, etc.<br \/>\u2022 Never dry soil samples in the oven: it will significantly change soil nutrient concentrations and induce wrong soil fertility diagnostic.<br \/>A soil test performed at Clemson Agricultural Service Laboratory is at a current price of US$ 6. This is a low investment considering the information you will receive and that adjusting soil pH can lead to an increase in forage production and nutrient availability in the soil. In addition, being able to apply the needed amount of a certain nutrient will also lead to an increase in forage production, prevent nutrient losses and proper allocation of resources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p style=\"text-align:left\"><br \/><strong>References:<\/strong><br \/>Kichler, J. 2021. Strategically fertilizing forages. UGA Extension. https:\/\/site.extension.uga.edu\/forageteam\/2021\/03\/strategically-fertilizing-forages\/\u00a0<br \/>Msimbira, L.A., &amp; Smith, D.L. 2020. The roles of plant growth promoting microbes in enhancing plant tolerance to acidity and alkalinity stresses. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 4: 1-14. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fsufs.2020.00106 <br \/>USDA \u2013 United States Department of Agriculture. 2024. Agricultural Thesaurus. https:\/\/agclass.nal.usda.gov\/vocabularies\/nalt-core\/concept?uri=https%3A\/\/lod.nal.usda.gov\/nalt\/968<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Submitted by: Leo Vieira-Filho, Postdoctoral FellowLiliane Silva, CU Assistant Professor and CUCES Forages Specialist Soil Fertility Assessment = Soil Test!Soil fertility is \u201cthe quality of a soil that enables it to provide nutrients in adequate amounts and in proper balance for the growth of specified plants when other growth factors, such as light, moisture, temperature, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3929,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[41471],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-289","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cool-season-forages"],"fimg_url":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/289","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3929"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=289"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/289\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=289"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=289"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=289"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=289"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}},{"id":279,"date":"2024-06-18T18:01:29","date_gmt":"2024-06-18T18:01:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/?p=279"},"modified":"2024-07-23T14:58:24","modified_gmt":"2024-07-23T14:58:24","slug":"nutrient-cycling-and-carbon-accumulation-in-forage-livestock-systems","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/nutrient-cycling-and-carbon-accumulation-in-forage-livestock-systems\/","title":{"rendered":"Nutrient cycling and carbon accumulation in forage-livestock systems"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Submitted by: <\/h4>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Carlos Garcia, Forage-Livestock Systems Research Specialist II<br \/>Liliane Silva, Clemson University Assistant Professor and Forage-Livestock Systems Specialist<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p>\u00a0 \u00a0Forages are the primary feed source for livestock production systems worldwide due to low production costs, adapted species, and diversity. With the growing population agricultural systems are facing challenges in increasing food and fiber production while minimizing negative environmental impacts. Forage systems play an essential role in delivering ecosystem services, and their management directly affects their ability to do so. <br \/>\u00a0 \u00a0Ecosystem services (ES) are defined as the \u201cbenefits people obtain from ecosystems\u201d and they are classified into four categories: cultural, provisioning, regulating, and supporting benefits. Some examples of ES provided by grasslands include carbon sequestration, nutrient cycling, and wildlife and pollinators&#8217; habitat. Management practices affect forage stand production, longevity and resilience, nutrient cycling, animal performance, soil fertility, and health among others. This document will discuss few key points related to ES from forage systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Nutrient cycling<\/strong> <br \/>\u00a0 \u00a0Nutrient cycling can be defined as the movement of nutrients within and between the biotic (e.g., pasture, cattle, insects, soil microorganism, etc.) and abiotic (e.g., soil, water, air, light, soil minerals, temperature, etc.) components of a forage-livestock system or other agricultural ecosystems. These components constantly interact with each other. <br \/>\u00a0 \u00a0What does this mean? Forage systems rely on nutrients available in the soil to accumulate forage production and quality. A soil with poor nutrient levels or undergoing degradation (e.g., unproductive soil, high erosion levels, etc.) will affect the forage plant growth and production and may compromise persistence of the forage stand in the long term. Consequently, the livestock grazing in those pastures will have limited forage available for consumption, leading to compromised animal performance (e.g., reduction in milk and meat production). In addition, grazing systems without soil macrofauna present can limit or delay cattle excreta mineralization (the process that transforms organic matter into nutrients available for plant absorption and contributes to increase soil fertility) (Figure1).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"975\" height=\"777\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/06\/image.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-280\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/06\/image.png 975w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/06\/image-300x239.png 300w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/06\/image-768x612.png 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 975px) 100vw, 975px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p><br \/><strong>Litter decomposition<\/strong><br \/>\u00a0 \u00a0Litter is defined as the senescent material attached to the plant or already deposited on the soil surface (Figure 2). This process promotes nutrient cycling through the decomposition of plant materials and release of nutrient content into the soil. Leaves, stems, and other plant parts deposited on soil through losses during grazing and\/or natural senescence processes occurring in the plant are decomposed, releasing nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and carbon in the soil. These nutrients become available to plants and other microorganisms which can then use them within the ecosystem. Litter decomposition plays a crucial role in replenishing soil fertility and sustaining plant growth, making it an integral part of nutrient cycling in ecosystems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"565\" height=\"338\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/06\/image-1.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-281\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/06\/image-1.png 565w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/06\/image-1-300x179.png 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 565px) 100vw, 565px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Carbon accumulation<\/strong> <br \/>\u00a0 \u00a0Carbon accumulation in the soil arises from the deposition of various carbon-containing sources. This process entails the conversion of carbon captured by plants from the atmosphere into organic carbon stored into the soil. Soils under grasslands are large reserves of carbon. Atmospheric carbon is captured by grasslands in three units: live vegetation [including aboveground and belowground (root systems) biomass], litter, and soil. In Figure 3, a sample of a bahiagrass pasture was collected (left) and washed to assess above- and below-ground biomass contributions as sources of organic carbon. Soil was then collected on the same site to determine carbon accumulation over time in response to management practices implemented.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"608\" height=\"470\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/06\/image-2.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-282\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/06\/image-2.png 608w, https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/files\/2024\/06\/image-2-300x232.png 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 608px) 100vw, 608px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>\u00a0 \u00a0Forages are important for feeding animals because they are relatively inexpensive and can adapt to different environments. They need to be managed well to keep the environment healthy and help plants grow. This in turn helps animals stay healthy too. Nutrient cycling is very important to keep the soil fertile and help plants grow. Improper management of the soil can lead to less food for animals and make it harder for them to stay healthy. Therefore, prioritizing proper land management and promoting nutrient cycling within our farming systems are essential for maintaining balance and sustainability.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Submitted by: Carlos Garcia, Forage-Livestock Systems Research Specialist IILiliane Silva, Clemson University Assistant Professor and Forage-Livestock Systems Specialist \u00a0 \u00a0Forages are the primary feed source for livestock production systems worldwide due to low production costs, adapted species, and diversity. With the growing population agricultural systems are facing challenges in increasing food and fiber production while [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3929,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[41471],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-279","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cool-season-forages"],"fimg_url":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/279","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3929"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=279"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/279\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=279"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=279"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=279"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.clemson.edu\/livestock\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=279"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}]