Forage accumulation and nutritive value of four peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) market types in the US Southern Great Plains

Dual use crops are becoming popular as resources like land and water become scarcer. Annual peanuts are an important food crop grown worldwide that can also be used as forage or hay. Replicated trials evaluated the late season (≥15 weeks after planting) forage accumulations and nutritive values (acid detergent fiber, carbon content, crude protein, invitro true digestibility, neutral detergent fiber, nitrogen content, and relative feed value) of four market types near Clovis, NM and El Reno, OK in 2019 and 2020. Statistical analyses (p ≤ .05) showed all traits were affected by the interaction between market type and growing environment. Overall, forage accumulations for all market types ranged from 2.7 to 6.5 Mg ha−1 with relative feed values of 107–155. The location average across sites was 4.45 Mg ha−1 with relative feed value of 132. The Virginia market types produced large amounts of biomass. However, the Valencia market type generated the greatest nutritive values. This study indicates harvesting late‐season biomass of peanuts for hay may be an option that allows producers to generate more income from limited land and water resources. However, both market type and environmental factors, such as rainfall/irrigation, play important roles in production and forage nutritive values of peanut forage.


| INTRODUCTION
Annual peanuts are an important food crop, with over 33 million tonnes being produced annually, worldwide (FAO STAT, 2022).Currently, there is a growing interest in including the use of annual peanuts as forage for stand management (i.e., poor germination or seedling death), due to limited resources such as water and land availability.Usually, producers that want to increase land productivity by planting dualpurpose forage/grain crops generally use cereal crops, such as wheat (Harrison et al., 2011;Redmon et al., 1995).However, forage of legumes like peanuts have greater crude protein and digestibility than grasses, which makes their cultivation important for producers (Waghorn et al., 1989;Wilson, 1994).Research in the southeastern United States showed biomass accumulations of peanut exceeded 3 Mg ha À1 when harvested at the R2 and R8 stages (Boote, 1982), with crude protein ranging between 77 and 232 g kg À1 depending on cultivar and harvest time (Foster et al., 2012).Additionally, the chemical composition of peanut stover is similar to alfalfa hay that is harvested at full bloom (Yang, 2005).Previous research indicated harvesting biomass of Runner-type peanuts for hay at 18-22 weeks after planting had no impact on peanut yield and could be an economically feasible possibility for peanut producers (Sorensen et al., 2009).
Peanuts in the United States are divided into four market types (Runner, Spanish, Valencia, and Virginia).The Runner and Virginia types are from the subspecies hypogaea, whereas the Spanish and Valencia types represent the subspecies fastigiate (Anco & Thomas, 2021;Gregory et al., 1980).Runner-type peanuts are grown in the US states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Texas.Spanish-type peanuts are grown in Oklahoma and Texas.Valenciatype peanuts are grown in Arkansas, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Carolina, and Texas.Virginia-type peanuts are grown in North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia.Each of these states has a wide range of day length, precipitation, and temperature, during summers, which shows a degree of adaptability present in these market types for different environmental and growing conditions.
The Runner, Spanish, Valencia, and Virginia market types have been evaluated for forage/hay production (Lauriault & Puppala, 2020;Quinn, 1908;Santos & Sutton, 1982;Sorensen et al., 2009).However, to our knowledge, there are no comparisons of the four market types for forage/hay production within specific locations, possibly due to differences in adaptability.The objective of this study was to determine the best end-of-season time to harvest biomass for hay with highnutritive values from the four market types of peanuts, for two geographically separated locations with differences in growing conditions.

| El Reno, OK Site information
On June 5, 2019, 10 peanut genotypes (Georgia-11J [Branch, 2012], Georgia-09B [Branch, 2010], Lariat [Chamberlin et al., 2018], Ole [Chamberlin et al., 2015], NMSU-M-2 [New Mexico State breeding line], NMSU-308 [New Mexico State breeding line], NuMex 01 [Puppala & Tallury, 2014], NMSU-310 [New Mexico State breeding line], Span-17 [Branch & Brenneman, 2018], and Wynne) representing four distinct market types (Runner, Spanish, Valencia, and Virginia) were planted in plots at the Grazinglands Research Laboratory, El Reno, OK (35 34 0 N; 98 2 0 W, 414 m a.s.l.).Additional information about the genotypes can be found in Table 1.Planting in 2019 was delayed due to excessive rainfall (408 mm) during May of 2019.The plots were 7.6 m long by 1.5 m wide, with 0.25 m between rows that were oriented in an East-West configuration.This interrow spacing is slightly greater than "Twin-Row Planting" (0.18-0.23 m), which is practiced throughout parts of the United States.The plots were organized in a randomized complete block design with three replications.Soils at the site were members of the Norge silt loam (fine-silty, mixed thermic, Udic Paleustolls) series.The soil pH is 5.9, with an electrical conductivity (EC) of 0.0 dSm À1 , and soil organic carbon (SOC) of 42 Mg ha À1 within the upper 0-to 0.   (Puppala et al., 2018).There were no major insect or disease infestations during the growing seasons.

| Data collection El Reno, OK and Clovis, NM
Biomass was harvested from randomly designated 0.25 m 2 quadrats in each plot by manual clipping, starting 17 weeks after planting and continuing weekly until killing frost (0 C). Pod yield was not impacted by harvesting biomass at 17 weeks after planting in Georgia, so cuttings occurred at this time (Sorensen et al., 2009).
However, this timing may need to be adjusted for the arid American Southwest.For each sampling date, one random quadrat per plot was sampled at a cutting height of 5 cm.Fresh weight of biomass was determined, then samples were dried at 65 C for 72 h, re-weighed to defined dry matter, and subsequently ground to a 2.0-mm particle size for laboratory analysis in a Thomas Scientific Wiley Mill (Swedesboro, NJ, USA).The ground particles of all samples were scanned with a benchtop NIR (Unity Scientific Spectra Star XT with UCal calibration software, Westborough, MA, USA), and attributes related to nutritive value (acid detergent fiber [ADF], in vitro true digestibility [IVTD], and neutral detergent fiber [NDF]) were evaluated on 10% of samples with wet chemistry each year.A subsample of each ground sample was also evaluated for percent C and percent N using a Vario Macro Cube Organic Elemental Organizer (Langenselbold, Germany).

| Data analyses
Data were analyzed with the Proc GLIMMIX procedure in SAS Studios 3.8 (SAS Institute Inc., 2021).The market type and environment (location and year) main effects or market type and season length (date of planting to date of harvest), and their interaction, were considered fixed effects, whereas the intercept of the linear predictor was considered a random effect (i.e., the intercept of the linear predictor contains an intercept term that varies at the level of the center effect), with season length (time between harvest and planting) as the subject (level).Mean separations and determination of least significant differences were evaluated using the Tukey adjustment or Tukey-Kramer adjustment for unbalanced designs.When data did not follow a normal distribution (i.e., percentages), the link/ilink functions (link the data scale to the model scale) were used.Additionally, the slice statement was used to test inferences when there was a significant interaction between main effects.Subsequently, the data were manually sliced by environment to define how market types performed during the season using the Proc GLIMMIX procedure.
Proc univariate routines were used to determine the overall standard deviation for each trait and the standard deviation for each trait for a specific market type and season length.The standard deviations were used to calculate a coefficient of relative plasticity for each trait (Kumar et al., 2022;Sadras et al., 2013Sadras et al., , 2019)).
Plasticity ¼ standard deviation of market type and season length standard deviation of all market types and season lengths : 3 | RESULTS

| Impact of environment and market type interactions
Growing environment by market type interactions had a significant effect on all measured forage traits (Table 2).Biomass production ranged from a high of 6.5 Mg ha À1 for Spanish-type peanuts at El Reno in 2019 to a low of 2.7 Mg ha À1 for Runner-type peanuts at El Reno in 2020 (Table 2).The significant interaction between environments and market types likely resulted from Spanish-type and Valencia-type peanuts performing the best at El Reno during both years.In contrast, T A B L E 2 Biomass accumulation and nutritive value of peanut forage at El Reno, OK and Clovis, NM in 2019 and 2020 and probability of model effects.The environment by market type interactions for ADF in cell walls was the reverse of the interaction in biomass production, with El Reno being more consistent between years, and Clovis more variable ( with a range of 143-124, compared with 155-107, respectively.RFQ was highly correlated to RFV (r = .99),so only results for RFV are presented.

| Impact of market type
Overall, Virginia-type peanuts produced the greatest amounts of forage, whereas the Valencia type had the greatest nutritive values (Table 2).There was a 35% difference between market types that produced the greatest (Virginia) and least (Runner) amounts of peanut forage.The ADF content in forage was greatest for Spanish-type peanuts and the least for Valencia-type peanuts, with a difference in means of 46%.The average NDF of peanut forage was greatest for Virginia (46.1%) and least for Valencia (44.9%).There was a 225% difference in the average RFV of peanut forage produced by the Valencia (greatest) and Virginia types (least).The average C content ranged from 40.0% (Virginia) to 39.0% (Spanish).There was a 16% difference in the average N content between market types with the greatest and least amounts (Virginia and Valencia, respectively).There was a difference of 100% between the average CP of forage produced by Virginia-type peanuts (greatest) and Valencia-type peanuts (least).The average IVTD of peanut forage ranged from 79.2% for Virginia types to 78.4% for Spanish types.
The market type had little influence on most nutritive values of forage except CP and RFV (Table 2).Overall, Virginia-type peanuts produced forage with the greatest amounts of crude protein (12.5%), while Valencia had the least amounts (11.3%).The RFV ranged from 136 for the Valencia market type to 130 for the Spanish market type.

| Within environment
Overall, the genotypes performed similarly within growing environments, with most differences due to changes in season length (Table 2).There was a significant market type by season length interaction for forage production at El Reno in 2019.Late season rainfall ($20 weeks after planting) likely caused this interaction.This rainfall caused rapid growth, especially for the Spanish type, which had the lowest biomass accumulation before the rainfall event and the greatest afterward.For main effects, significant differences in market type were observed in biomass accumulations at Clovis during 2020.The Virginia-type peanuts were significantly more productive than the other market types at all sampling dates.There was a 56% difference in production between the Virginia (greatest biomass accumulation) and Valencia (lowest biomass accumulation) types.(23 weeks after planting).

| Phenotypic plasticity and forage trait associations
The Runner-type peanuts showed the most variation in plasticity (Table 3) with four traits (C, IVTD, NDF, and RFV) being the greatest.
In contrast, Valencia-type peanuts had four traits with the least plasticity (biomass accumulation, ADF, CP, and IVTD).Overall, NDF was the trait with the greatest variation for plasticity with a 15-fold difference.Alternatively, CP had the smallest amount of variation with a sixfold difference.Plasticity for grain biomass accumulation was greatest for the Spanish-type peanuts with a 10-fold increase at Week 21 (2.05) compared with Week 15 (0.19).However, the plasticity for the Valencia-type peanuts was only fourfold for Week 21 (1.28) compared with Week 15 (0.29).Plasticity for CP was greatest for the Virginia-type peanuts with a fivefold difference for Week 18 (1.42)compared with Week 16 (0.28) and least for the Valencia type with a three-fold difference for Week 25 (1.18) compared with Week 24 (0.40).
Biomass accumulation had a small but significant association with IVTD and CP.The NDF fraction of cell wall was highly correlated with ADF and negatively correlated with C, CP, and IVTD.The IVTD was positively correlated with C and CP, whereas C was correlated with CP (Table 4).Biomass accumulation correlated with CP and IVTD.
ADF was negatively correlated with C, CP, and IVTD and positively correlated with NDF.Carbon was positively correlated with CP and IVTD but was negatively correlated with NDF.Crude protein was correlated with IVTD and negatively correlated with NDF.Additionally, IVTD and NDF were negatively correlated.

| DISCUSSION
Although peanuts have long been used as forage or hay in the United States, there was limited information directly comparing the accumulation of forage and its nutritive values for the four market types, possibly due to general differences in environmental adaptability.In this study, the effects of both market type and environment were important factors driving responses of all traits evaluated.However, trends were observed for most traits.Greater biomass production was observed at Clovis compared with El Reno, whereas greater forage nutritive values were observed at El Reno.This response was likely related to the use of supplemental irrigation at Clovis, which resulted in more-uniform levels of production across years and market types, compared with peanut growth at El Reno, which occurred under rainfed conditions.Supplemental irrigation was shown to support a 7-18% increase in biomass production compared with 2/3 available soil water, whereas a 20-39% increase in production occurred relative to 1/3 available soil water (Pimratch et al., 2008).
The current study showed a significant market type by environment interaction for biomass accumulation.Although biomass accumulation was not directly measured when evaluating the phenotypic and agronomic traits of a peanut core collection, Upadhyaya et al. (2005) noted plant height and number of primary branches had broad sense heritability of 85% and 53%, respectively, indicating environmental influences of 15% and 47%.The accumulations of forage biomass noted in the current study averaged 4.4 and 4.5 Mg ha À1 , at the two sites, which was slightly greater than biomass accumulations (3.6-2.4Mg ha À1 ) obtained in a study evaluating late-season harvest of forage from Valencia-type peanuts (Lauriault & Puppala, 2020).In the current study, Virginia-type peanuts produced the greatest amounts of biomass, averaged across all four growing environments.
Other studies also determined Virginia-type peanuts had greater potential to produce biomass than Spanish-peanuts (Vara Prasad et al., 2000;Wright et al., 1991).Wright et al. (1991) attributed greater productivity for Virginia-type peanuts to a longer growing season than Spanish-type peanuts and greater corresponding total The N content observed for peanut forage in this study (2.0% average) was similar for contents noted for Virginia-type peanuts by Santos & Sutton, 1982 (2.1%).However, CP of forage from Valenciatype peanuts (10.3%) was considerably lower than observed by Lauriault and Puppala (2020) (14.5%) but greater than the 8% (unknown market type) observed by Packard et al. (2007).CP is influenced by harvest date and amounts of water provided by applied irrigation and/or precipitation (Lauriault & Puppala, 2020;Santos & Sutton, 1982;Wright et al., 1991).Although the amounts of CP recorded during the current study were lower than some earlier studies, the amounts were adequate to improve gains by most classes of beef cattle by additional 0.25-0.50kg day À1 (Perry, 1995).
The market types performed similarly within a specific environment, with most differences occurring due to season length.Other researchers noted pod yield and leaf area index were similar across market types grown in the same environment (location and irrigation rate) (Zurweller, Rowland, et al., 2018;Zurweller, Xavier, et al., 2018).
At both locations of the current study, accumulation of forage decreased at 17 weeks after planting, but late-season rainfall caused plants to recover slightly until $22 weeks after planting.Other studies have also noted a decline in biomass as plants matured during 17-22 weeks after planting (Lauriault & Puppala, 2020;Santos & Sutton, 1982;Sorensen et al., 2009).
The IVTD of peanut forage at El Reno also began declining 18 weeks after planting.In contrast, the digestibility of peanut forage at Clovis began to decrease at 23 weeks after planting in 2019 and 17 weeks after planting in 2020.This decline is in agreement with other studies that showed a decrease in digestibility of peanut forage starting approximately 18 weeks after planting (Lauriault & Puppala, 2020;Santos & Sutton, 1982), as leaf to stem ratios of biomass declines with maturation.The slower decline in nutritive value of peanut forage at Clovis compared with El Reno was likely related to lack of irrigation at El Reno, as more arid environments reduce the digestibility of forage (Lee, 2018).
The impacts of season length within a growing environment also resulted in differences in C content and RFV between market types.
The differences in C content and RFV are likely due to differences in growth habit.Market types with an erect growth habit (i.e., Valencia and Spanish) have lower leaf area indices and lower interception of photosynthetically active radiation (Haro et al., 2017).At El Reno, all market types showed continual increases in C content in peanut forage until 19 weeks after planting during both years.However, C content at Clovis increased until 22-23 weeks after planting, depending on the year.Santos and Sutton (1982) observed leaf and stem growth by peanut increased through week 18, then decreased as C was reallocated to pod filling.
Differences in genotypes are often masked by environmental effects and genotype by environmental interactions (Chenu, 2015).
However, plasticity in responses, which accounts for some environmental influences, can be a target for breeding programs (Bradshaw, 1965;Sadras et al., 2013Sadras et al., , 2016Sadras et al., , 2019)).The lower plasticity for biomass accumulation observed at Clovis suggests inclusion of supplemental irrigation provided a more stable environment, which will allow for the identification of superior genotypes.Alternatively, the lower plasticity for all traits that describe nutritive values (except NDF) at El Reno would indicate that growing peanuts under rainfed conditions would allow for identifications of superior genotypes nutritive traits.Nutritive values of forage are influenced by many environmental factors such as temperature, daylength, row spacing, and cutting frequency, though there is also a genetic component to responses (Capstaff & Miller, 2018;Chenu, 2015;Cusicanqui & Lauer, 1999;Sadeghpour et al., 2022).The lower plasticity of biomass accumulation, ADF, CP, and IVTD observed for Valencia-type peanuts and lower plasticity of C, NDF, and RFV of Virginia-type peanuts indicates environmental impact on these market types were lower.
As plasticity is inheritable, improvements in biomass accumulation and traits that define nutritive value should be achievable, as shown in tomatoes, chickpea, and various other crops (Bradshaw, 1965;Sadras et al., 2016;Williams, 1960).The interbreeding of Valencia-Virginia-type peanuts may lead to annual-type forage peanuts capable of large accumulations of biomass with high nutritive values.
The 15-to-17-week period would be the best time to make these selections for all traits except C and CP that were most stable at 24 weeks.However, as shown in this and other studies, these are not the growing periods when peanuts have obtained their highest biomass accumulation and nutritive value (Lauriault & Puppala, 2020;Santos & Sutton, 1982).A comparison of selections of the market type with the highest value for a particular trait versus a selection of the lowest plasticity for a certain trait would be an interesting comparison.

| CONCLUSION
The importance of annual peanuts as a food crop that supports human societies is well-documented.Their value as a high-quality forage to support livestock, and thereby serve as a dual-purpose crop, is also promising.However, we noted a series of factors that can affect the performance of annual peanuts as forage, as recorded Additionally, a comparison of the genetic gain between selecting for the highest value of a particular trait or the lowest plasticity in responses would be valuable for peanut production in the SGP.Studies evaluating pesticide use will also be required as some pesticides currently used for peanut production are prohibited for hay or forage crops.
15-m depth (Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, 2023).Before seeding, stubble of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) was incorporated into the soil using a vertical tillage implement.Lime was applied at a rate of 4.3 Mg ECCE ha À1 (effective calcium carbonate equivalent) to modify soil pH, as recommended by initial soil tests.No additional fertility adjustments were conducted.Peanuts were planted at two seeding rates (9 and 17 seeds m À2 ), which may affect forage biomass accumulation and pod yield.A second planting date was performed on June 13, 2019.Weeds were controlled with Clethodim 2EC at a rate of 280 gha À1 active ingredient (a.i.) and Butyrac (2,4-DB) at a rate of 350 gha À1 a.i.(although it is not recommended for forage/hay of peanuts) throughout the growing season.Both herbicides were applied throughout the growing season as needed and in accordance with recommendations on the herbicide labels.The trial was replicated in 2020 with seeding dates of May 29, 2020 and June 4, 2020.No irrigation was applied throughout the growing seasons.Rainfall was 318 mm in 2019 and 398 mm in 2020, which was below the long-term average (May-November; 1990-2020) of 585 ± 161 mm.
2019 growing season, Valencia had the greatest RFV (135) and Runner had the least (125).At Clovis during 2020, Valencia had the greatest RFV (147), and Runner had the least (139).Season length significantly affected biomass produced (except El Reno during 2019), C content, and RFV for all environments.The biomass at El Reno during 2020 increased until a peak at 19 weeks after planting (3.3 Mg ha À1 ) and decreased to 1.8 Mg ha À1 by Week 23.At Clovis during 2019, biomass increased from 2.5 Mg ha À1 at 15 weeks after planting to a peak of 6.5 Mg ha À1 (23 weeks after planting).At Clovis during 2020, the biomass rose and fell weekly with a maximum of 5.5 Mg ha À1 (22 weeks after planting) to a low of 3.6 Mg ha À1 amounts of intercepted radiation.Vara Prasad et al. (2000) attributed the greater amounts of biomass produced by Virginia-type peanuts to more reproductive structures in Spanish-type peanuts and a greater reallocation of resources from vegetative growth to reproductive growth.However, Haro et al. (2017) determined that peanuts in Argentina with a procumbent growth habit generated greater biomass.These two studies indicated light interception and biomass production are influenced by the growing environment, or cultivars evaluated, especially since Haro et al. (2017) acknowledged breeding efforts in Argentina have focused on procumbent genotypes.
in the variable responses at the two research sites.Both market type and environmental factors encountered at a location, such as availability of moisture, affect productivity and nutritive value of peanut forage.Peanut biomass harvested 17, or more, weeks after planting produces a forage crop of average nutritive value, and harvest of biomass can be delayed until later in the growing seasons (i.e., first frost date) to increase accumulations.Across the two locations within the SGP included in the study, and growing seasons encountered, all the tested types of peanuts provided useful amounts of high-quality forage.Virginia market types produced more forage, whereas Valencia market types provided greater RFVs.Dual use of peanuts may provide producers in the SGP with the ability to maximize use of the scarce resources of land and water while furnishing an additional source of income.However, economic studies are needed to confirm the feasibility of combining nut and forage production for producers.
Ten peanut genotypes representing four market types grown at Clovis, NM and El Reno, OK.
Note: Days to maturity are based on initial genotype development.Plant introductions are from the US department of agriculture germplasm resources information network.Mexico (34 35 0 N; 103 12 0 W; altitude 1348 m) in 2019 and 2020.The same 10 peanut genotypes (Georgia-11J, Georgia-09B, Lariat, Table2).Spanish-type peanuts had greater ADF at Clovis, whereas the Runner type had greater ADF at El Reno.The ADF ranged from 40.4% for the Spanish type at Clovis in 2019 to 29.5% for Clovis in 2020.The plasticity for ADF was greater at Clovis during both years with a range of 0.96 for Clovis in 2020 to 0.59 for El Reno in 2020.In However, the Spanish-type peanuts consistently had the least digestibility at Clovis.The IVTD ranged from 81.1% for Valencia at El Reno in 2019 to 76.3% for Spanish at Clovis during 2019 (Table2).The plasticity for IVTD was largest at Clovis during both years.The largest plasticity was observed during the 2020 season at Clovis, whereas the smallest observed plasticity occurred in the same year at El Reno (0.61).In comparison, the RFV of peanut forage ranged from a high of 155 for Valencia-type peanuts at Clovis during 2020 to a low of 107 for Spanish-type peanuts at Clovis in 2019 (Table2).Overall, 2020 produced greater RFV than 2019.
comparison, the interaction between environment and market types for NDF was likely due to greater NDF at Clovis during 2019, and while NDF at Clovis during 2020 was the lowest.There was no consistency in the different market types for NDF in cell wall, with the highest and lowest NDF varying among years and locations.The NDF ranged from 50.7% for Spanish-type peanuts at Clovis during 2019 to 40.2% for Valencia-types at Clovis during 2020.The plasticity for NDF was greatest at El Reno in 2019 (1.02) and lowest for El Reno during 2020 (0.59).Within the environment by market type interaction in C content (Table2), the Valencia market types had some of the highest concentrations during 2020 at El Reno, whereas Virginia-type peanuts had greater C contents at Clovis during 2019.The carbon content of peanut forage ranged from 42.9% for the Valencia, Virginia, and Runner market types at El Reno in 2020 to 36.1% for Spanish-type peanuts at Clovis during 2019.The plasticity for C content was greatest for Clovis in both years, with a range of 0.99 for Clovis in 2020 to 0.44 for El Reno in 2020.The N content of peanut forage within the environand the Runner type performing better at Clovis (second largest CP).The plasticity for CP was largest for Clovis during both years, with a range of 1.19 in Clovis during 2019 to 0.73 for El Reno during both years.The effects of interactions between environment and market type on IVTD were likely due to no consistencies in the market type with the greatest digestibility.Overall, the Clovis site produced greater amounts of peanut biomass, whereas the El Reno site produced forage with greater nutritive value (Table2).Biomass accumulation at Clovis averaged 4.5 Mg ha À1 , whereas accumulations at El Reno averaged 4.4 Mg ha À1 .At Clovis, amounts of biomass ranged from 5.5 to 3.5 Mg ha À1 , whereas biomass accumulations ranged from 6.5 to 2.7 Mg ha À1 at El Reno, indicating the presences of a degree of overlap in productivity across sites.For both years, biomass accumulation had a larger plasticity at El Reno than at Clovis.The ADF content of peanut forage at El Reno 8.3% at Clovis (Table2).These CP values overlapped or were slightly lower than late-season alfalfa (12-15%).The IVTD of peanut forage was greater at El Reno (80.3%) than at Clovis (77.2%) and ranged from 81.1-79.8% at El Reno, compared with 79.3-76.3% at Clovis.Peanut forage produced at El Reno had greater RFV (135) thanClovis (129) Phenotypic plasticity (unitless) of four peanut market types at El Reno, OK and Clovis, NM during different weeks of growing seasons (season length) in 2019 and 2020.
T A B L E 3 Correlation matrix of yield and forage quality traits.
T A B L E 4