Higher water soluble carbohydrate (WSC) content in pasture typically results in increased dry matter intake and milk yield for dairy cows, and lower urinary nitrogen excretion rates. A review of several studies found that pastures with WSC contents over 160g/kg DM generally increased intake by 1-2kg DM/day, milk yield by 1-3kg/day, and lowered urinary nitrogen excretion by 5-10% compared to pastures with lower WSC contents under 130g/kg DM.

1. Ryegrass discussion August 2010

4. Influence of Heading Date: Ryegrass heading date clarifications relative to NUI =0 Mar-May June-July Aug-Sep Oct-Nov Dec-Feb Early Mid-Season Late Very Late – 8 days & earlier – 7 days to +7 days +8 days to +21 days +22 days & greater

6. Canterbury – Late November 06 Hawkes Bay – May 07

7. What is the extent of NWS influence Diploids Tetraploids Tolosa 100% Bealey 100% ONE50 ~ 75% Halo ~62% Expo ~37 Base ~62% Impact ~50% Banquet ~50% Alto ~ 25% Banquet II ~25% Matrix ~ 40% Revolution ~ 40% Arrow ~ 50%

8. Monthly pasture growth rates at Poukawa 1998-2009

11. P205POU Ryegrass Seasonal and Total Yield relative to trial mean = 100 . Entry Winter Spring Summer Autumn Total One50 110 98 120 118 108 Alto 109 100 108 109 105 Bronsyn 99 105 106 102 104 Arrow 108 103 100 100 103 Bronsyn AR1 94 107 103 96 102 Kamo AR37 102 103 90 104 100 Cannon 102 98 98 100 99 Revolution AR1 96 98 102 96 99 Commando AR37 100 99 91 102 98 Nui 93 101 94 87 96 Trial Mean 2629 5576 2846 1573 12624 (kgDM/ha)

12. P205POU Ryegrass Yield by Year relative to trial mean = 100 Entry Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 One50 103 112 114 Alto 100 108 111 Bronsyn 101 105 108 Arrow 101 109 103 Bronsyn AR1 103 102 100 Kamo AR37 98 97 104 Cannon 100 98 97 Revolution AR1 102 96 93 Commando AR37 98 93 101 Nui 99 95 91 Trial mean 19609 7674 10589 (kgDM/ha)

13. P205POU Point analysis of ryegrass ground cover at end of trial * Point analysis assesses relative ryegrass persistence. Point analysis carried out 12 days after last grazing. Figures may vary depending on how soon after grazing they are taken. Entry Ryegrass Ground Cover (%) Kamo AR37 80 a Commando AR37 74 ab Arrow 70 bc Bronsyn 69 bd Alto 66 cd Cannon 66 cd One50 65 cd Bronsyn AR1 61 de Nui 61 de Revolution AR1 55 e LSD 5% 7 CV% 8 Trial Mean 65

17. Annual ryegrass production at Poukawa

18. A204POU Seasonal and Total Yield Relative to Trial Mean = 100 Entry Autumn Est. Winter Spring Summer 2nd Autumn Total Galaxy AR1 86 101 106 108 1018 108 Tabu 87 106 108 153 107 Warrior 98 106 108 103 105 Crusader 118 101 102 94 103 Status 103 93 106 105 101 Feast II 97 97 102 118 101 Kano 101 94 102 87 98 Archie 102 97 84 60 88 Tama 100 103 82 29 85 Trial Mean (kgDM/ha) 2465 3815 6361 1338 1018 14058

19. Table 4: A204POU Point analysis of sown ryegrass at end of trial May 2 2005 100 points per plot Entry Point analysis 2-May-05 Percent of 100 hits Galaxy AR1 45 a Tabu 4 b Warrior 3 b Crusader 1 b Status 2 b Feast II 4 b Kano 2 b Archie 2 b Tama 1 b LSD 10 Trial Mean (kg DM/ha) 6

20. A205POU Seasonal and Total Yield Relative to Trial Mean = 100 Entry Autumn Est. Winter Spring Summer 2nd Autumn Total Tabu 110 107 104 108 104 106 Delish AR1 68 99 99 126 105 104 Feast II 114 99 98 106 112 103 Galaxy AR1 80 98 95 114 103 100 Crusader 101 106 97 87 109 99 Moata 120 103 97 66 112 87 Trial Mean (kg DM/ha) 697 3645 6993 3606 2671 17611

21. A205POU Point Analysis and visual score of row strength (9 = dense) of ryegrass at end of trial: 28 June 2006 Entry Ryegrass Ground Cover (%) Visual score of row strength 9 = dense Galaxy AR1 74 ab 9.0 a Delish AR1 73 ab 8.8 a Feast II 65 bd 6.8 b Crusader 64 bd 6.5 b Tabu 60 ce 8.0 a Moata 54 de 3.3 d CV% 11.1 9.6 LSD (5% Level) 10.4 1.0 Trial Mean 65 7.1

27. Effect of WSC Content on Animal Production

28. Summary of effects on dairy– from Edwards et al. 2007 WSC Intake Milk yield Urine N (g/kg DM) (kg DM/day) (kg/day) (% of N intake) Author H L H L H L H L Miller et al. (2001a) 165 126 11.6 10.7 15.3 12.6 0.25 0.35 Miller et al. (2001b) 236 166 17.6 17.0 25.1 26.7 Miller et al. (2000) 234 194 14.6 14.8 21.4 21.9 0.17 0.26 Moorby et al (2006) 243 161 15.3 13.1 32.7 30.4 0.20 0.27 Tas et al. (2006a) 192 158 16.2 17.4 26.9 26.3 0.50 0.53 Tas et al (2006a) 131 93 14.7 14.9 24.7 23.8 0.56 0.53 Tas et al (2006a) 195 152 16.1 16.6 26.8 28.2 0.47 0.48 Tas et al (2006a) 113 98 13.7 14.7 22.5 23.9 0.55 0.56 Tas et al (2006b) 144 110 18.0 15.6 28.8 26.0 Tas et al (2006b) 131 87 18.4 17.4 25.7 25.2 Cosgrove et al (2007) S 200 167 20.9 20.9 Cosgrove et al (2007) S 215 195 25.5 25.1 Cosgrove et al (2007) A 170 161 11.3 9.6 Cosgrove et al (2007) A 159 150 11.7 11.0

29. Summary of effects on dairy– from Edwards et al. 2007 WSC Intake Milk yield Urine N (g/kg DM) (kg DM/day) (kg/day) (% of N intake) Author H L H L H L H L Miller et al. (2001a) 165 126 11.6 10.7 15.3 12.6 0.25 0.35 Miller et al. (2001b) 236 166 17.6 17.0 25.1 26.7 Miller et al. (2000) 234 194 14.6 14.8 21.4 21.9 0.17 0.26 Moorby et al (2006) 243 161 15.3 13.1 32.7 30.4 0.20 0.27 Tas et al. (2006a) 192 158 16.2 17.4 26.9 26.3 0.50 0.53 Tas et al (2006a) 131 93 14.7 14.9 24.7 23.8 0.56 0.53 Tas et al (2006a) 195 152 16.1 16.6 26.8 28.2 0.47 0.48 Tas et al (2006a) 113 98 13.7 14.7 22.5 23.9 0.55 0.56 Tas et al (2006b) 144 110 18.0 15.6 28.8 26.0 Tas et al (2006b) 131 87 18.4 17.4 25.7 25.2 Cosgrove et al (2007) S 200 167 20.9 20.9 Cosgrove et al (2007) S 215 195 25.5 25.1 Cosgrove et al (2007) A 170 161 11.3 9.6 Cosgrove et al (2007) A 159 150 11.7 11.0 4.1

30. Summary of effects on dairy– from Edwards et al. 2007 WSC Intake Milk yield Urine N (g/kg DM) (kg DM/day) (kg/day) (% of N intake) Author H L H L H L H L Miller et al. (2001a) 165 126 11.6 10.7 15.3 12.6 0.25 0.35 Miller et al. (2001b) 236 166 17.6 17.0 25.1 26.7 Miller et al. (2000) 234 194 14.6 14.8 21.4 21.9 0.17 0.26 Moorby et al (2006) 243 161 15.3 13.1 32.7 30.4 0.20 0.27 Tas et al. (2006a) 192 158 16.2 17.4 26.9 26.3 0.50 0.53 Tas et al (2006a) 131 93 14.7 14.9 24.7 23.8 0.56 0.53 Tas et al (2006a) 195 152 16.1 16.6 26.8 28.2 0.47 0.48 Tas et al (2006a) 113 98 13.7 14.7 22.5 23.9 0.55 0.56 Tas et al (2006b) 144 110 18.0 15.6 28.8 26.0 Tas et al (2006b) 131 87 18.4 17.4 25.7 25.2 Cosgrove et al (2007) S 200 167 20.9 20.9 Cosgrove et al (2007) S 215 195 25.5 25.1 Cosgrove et al (2007) A 170 161 11.3 9.6 Cosgrove et al (2007) A 159 150 11.7 11.0 4.1

31. Summary of effects on dairy– from Edwards et al. 2007 WSC Intake Milk yield Urine N (g/kg DM) (kg DM/day) (kg/day) (% of N intake) Author H L H L H L H L Miller et al. (2001a) 165 126 11.6 10.7 15.3 12.6 0.25 0.35 Miller et al. (2001b) 236 166 17.6 17.0 25.1 26.7 Miller et al. (2000) 234 194 14.6 14.8 21.4 21.9 0.17 0.26 Moorby et al (2006) 243 161 15.3 13.1 32.7 30.4 0.20 0.27 Tas et al. (2006a) 192 158 16.2 17.4 26.9 26.3 0.50 0.53 Tas et al (2006a) 131 93 14.7 14.9 24.7 23.8 0.56 0.53 Tas et al (2006a) 195 152 16.1 16.6 26.8 28.2 0.47 0.48 Tas et al (2006a) 113 98 13.7 14.7 22.5 23.9 0.55 0.56 Tas et al (2006b) 144 110 18.0 15.6 28.8 26.0 Tas et al (2006b) 131 87 18.4 17.4 25.7 25.2 Cosgrove et al (2007) S 200 167 20.9 20.9 Cosgrove et al (2007) S 215 195 25.5 25.1 Cosgrove et al (2007) A 170 161 11.3 9.6 Cosgrove et al (2007) A 159 150 11.7 11.0 4.1

32. Summary of effects on dairy– from Edwards et al. 2007 WSC Intake Milk yield Urine N (g/kg DM) (kg DM/day) (kg/day) (% of N intake) Author H L H L H L H L Miller et al. (2001a) 165 126 11.6 10.7 15.3 12.6 0.25 0.35 Miller et al. (2001b) 236 166 17.6 17.0 25.1 26.7 Miller et al. (2000) 234 194 14.6 14.8 21.4 21.9 0.17 0.26 Moorby et al (2006) 243 161 15.3 13.1 32.7 30.4 0.20 0.27 Tas et al. (2006a) 192 158 16.2 17.4 26.9 26.3 0.50 0.53 Tas et al (2006a) 131 93 14.7 14.9 24.7 23.8 0.56 0.53 Tas et al (2006a) 195 152 16.1 16.6 26.8 28.2 0.47 0.48 Tas et al (2006a) 113 98 13.7 14.7 22.5 23.9 0.55 0.56 Tas et al (2006b) 144 110 18.0 15.6 28.8 26.0 Tas et al (2006b) 131 87 18.4 17.4 25.7 25.2 Cosgrove et al (2007) S 200 167 20.9 20.9 Cosgrove et al (2007) S 215 195 25.5 25.1 Cosgrove et al (2007) A 170 161 11.3 9.6 Cosgrove et al (2007) A 159 150 11.7 11.0 4.1 Low vs High CP

33. WSC:CP vs N in urine graph

34. Summary of effects on lamb– from Edwards et al. 2007 WSC Intake Liveweight gain (g/kg DM) (kg DM/day) (kg/day) Author H L H L H L Lee et al. (2001) 143 89 1.0 1.2 312 271 Lee et al. (2001) 113 75 1.7 1.3 244 194 Lee et al. (2001) 92 84 1.1 1.2 186 175 Marley et al (2007) 115 100 47.1 51.5 Marley et al (2007) 113 100 98.4 71.7 suckling

35. Summary of effects on lamb– from Edwards et al. 2007 WSC Intake Liveweight gain (g/kg DM) (kg DM/day) (kg/day) Author H L H L H L Lee et al. (2001) 143 89 1.0 1.2 312 271 Lee et al. (2001) 113 75 1.7 1.3 244 194 Lee et al. (2001) 92 84 1.1 1.2 186 175 Marley et al (2007) 115 100 47.1 51.5 Marley et al (2007) 113 100 98.4 71.7 2.8 suckling

36. Summary of effects on lamb– from Edwards et al. 2007 WSC Intake Liveweight gain (g/kg DM) (kg DM/day) (kg/day) Author H L H L H L Lee et al. (2001) 143 89 1.0 1.2 312 271 Lee et al. (2001) 113 75 1.7 1.3 244 194 Lee et al. (2001) 92 84 1.1 1.2 186 175 Marley et al (2007) 115 100 47.1 51.5 Marley et al (2007) 113 100 98.4 71.7 2.8 suckling

37. Summary of effects on lamb– from Edwards et al. 2007 WSC Intake Liveweight gain (g/kg DM) (kg DM/day) (g/day) Author H L H L H L Lee et al. (2001) 143 89 1.0 1.2 312 271 Lee et al. (2001) 113 75 1.7 1.3 244 194 Lee et al. (2001) 92 84 1.1 1.2 186 175 Marley et al (2007) 115 100 47.1 51.5 Marley et al (2007) 113 100 98.4 71.7 2.8 suckling