Effects of Amount and Chemical Form of Selenium Amendments on Forage Selenium Concentrations and Species Profiles

• Published in: Biological trace element research 2023-10, Vol.201 (10), p.4951-4960
• Main Authors: Hall, Jean A., Bobe, Gerd, Filley, Shelby J., Pirelli, Gene J., Bohle, Mylen G., Wang, Guojie, Davis, T. Zane, Bañuelos, Gary S.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biochemistry; biofortification; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Biotechnology; dose response; Forage; humans; Life Sciences; Livestock; Nutrition; Oncology; Oregon; Selenium; Sodium; Sodium selenate; spring; Trace elements
• ISSN: 0163-4984; 1559-0720
• DOI: 10.1007/s12011-022-03541-8

Selenium (Se) agronomic biofortification of plants is effective for alleviating Se deficiencies in human and livestock populations. Less is known about how higher selenate amendment rates, or how foliar compared with granular selenate amendments affect forage Se concentrations. Therefore, we compared the effects of a higher sodium selenate foliar amendment rate (900 vs. 90 g Se ha −1 ), and two selenate amendment methods (liquid foliar sodium selenate vs. granular slow-release Selcote Ultra ® at 0, 45, and 90 g Se ha −1 ) on Se concentrations and Se species in forages across Oregon. The 10 × amendment rate (900 g Se ha −1 ) resulted in 6.4 × higher forage Se concentrations in the first cut (49.19 vs. 7.61 mg Se kg −1 plant DM, respectively) compared with the 90 g ha −1 amendment rate, indicating that forages can tolerate higher selenate amendment rates. Most Se was incorporated as SeMet (75%) in the harvested portion of the forage (37 mg Se kg −1 forage DM of the first cut) and only a limited amount was stored in the selenate reserve pool in the leaves (~ 5 mg Se kg −1 forage DM). Higher application rates of selenate amendment increased forage Se concentrations in first and second cuts, but carry over in subsequent years was negligible. Application of foliar selenate vs. granular Selcote Ultra ® amendments, between 0 and 90 g Se ha −1 , both resulted in a linear, dose-dependent increase in forage Se concentration. Amendments differed in their Se incorporation pattern (Se%), in that, first cut forage Se concentrations were higher with foliar selenate amendment and second, third, and residual (following spring) cut forage Se concentrations were higher with granular Selcote Ultra® amendment. Given the linear relationship between forage Se concentrations and whole-blood Se concentrations in livestock consuming Se-biofortified forage, we conclude that targeted grazing or other forage feeding strategies will allow producers to adapt to either selenate-amendment form.