02142naa a2200313 a 450000100080000000500110000800800410001902400510006010000180011124500950012926000090022452012490023365000170148265000130149965000180151265000120153065000250154265000230156765000130159065300240160365300260162765300250165370000190167870000190169770000180171670000190173470000220175377300530177521470962023-04-25       2021    bl uuuu     u00u1 u    #d7 ahttps://doi.org/10.15446/acag.v70n3.885712DOI1 aBARROS, L. M.  aSowing rate and its effects on forage yield of tetraploid ryegrass.h[electronic resource]  c2021  aThere is a shortage of information about the ryegrass crop (Lolium multiflorum Lam.), especially regarding the suitable sowing rate. Thus, the present work aimed to determine the most adequate sowing rate for tetraploid ryegrass cultivars. A tetraploid ryegrass population was sown at different densities: 150, 300, 600, 900, 1200, 1500, 1800 seeds/m². The number of plants per m², percentage of soil cover, leaf yield and green and dry forage yield were evaluated. The experimental design was randomized blocks with three replications. To observe the behavior of the pasture at different densities for each cut, regression analysis was performed, through which it was possible to verify that the sowing rate has greater influence on the initial cut of the crop. In all the variables analyzed by regression, only the second cut presented a linear trend favorable to the increase in density. In the other cuts, an increase was observed, both in the height of plants and in the yield variables, up to the density of 1500 seeds/m², with a subsequent fall to the highest density, indicating that higher densities may be detrimental to pasture yield. Therefore the density of 1500 seeds/m² is the most suitable for tetraploid ryegrass cultivars.  aForage crops  aPastures  aPlant density  aAzevém  aGramínea Forrageira  aLolium Multiflorum  aPastagem  aBreeding population  aCultivar tetraplóide  aTetraploid cultivars1 aMITTELMANN, A.1 aPEDROSO, C. E.1 aBORTOLINI, F.1 aVERONEZ, R. P.1 aTAVARES, L. G. R.  tActa Agronómicagv. 70, n. 3, p. 317-322, 2021.