Soybean cyst [SCN, Heterodera glycines Ichinohe], southern root-knot [RKN, Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid and White) Chitwood] and reniform nematodes [RN, Rotylenchlus reniformis (Linford and Oliveria)] are common plant-parasitic nematode species in southern US fields. Each nematode individually or collectively causes significant economic losses to field grown soybean. A subset of 120 soybean plant introductions (PIs) selected from the USDA Soybean Germplasm Collection have been shown to be resistant to one or more SCN populations (HG Types); however, many of these PIs have not been screened for resistance to either RKN or RN. The
objective
of this research was to evaluate these germplasm accessions for resistance to RKN and RN. The evaluation for RKN resistance was conducted in RKN infested field plantings after potatoes near Charleston, MO in 2006 and 2007. The evaluation for RN resistance was performed in a greenhouse at Fayetteville, AR, in 2007. Out of these accessions, 64 PIs were identified with high or moderate resistance to RKN. Of these 64 lines, 24 accessions showed good resistance to both RKN and RN. These new sources of resistance to multiple nematodes will be valuable materials for soybean breeding programs to develop new resistant cultivars that can overcome yield losses caused by one or more of these nematode species.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• Combating Root-Knot Nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.): From Molecular Mechanisms to Resistant Crops
  Himanshu Yadav, Philip A. Roberts, Damar Lopez-Arredondo
  Plants.2025; 14(9): 1321.     CrossRef
• Evaluation Soybean Cultivars for Reaction to Heterodera glycines Populations HG Types 7 and 1.3.4.7 in Northeast China
  Jingsheng Chen, Yuanyuan Zhou, Yanfeng Hu, Di Zhao, Changjun Zhou, Rujie Shi, Miao Sun, Li Zhang, Guowei Chen, Haiyan Li, Lijie Chen, Guosheng Xiao
  Life.2023; 13(1): 248.     CrossRef
• Development of SNP molecular markers associated with resistance to reniform nematode in soybean using KASP genotyping
  Juliet E. Wilkes, Benjamin Fallen, Chris Saski, Paula Agudelo
  Euphytica.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
• Registration of ‘S16‐11644C’: A maturity group IV soybean cultivar with high‐yielding performance and broad disease resistance
  Pengyin Chen, J. Grover Shannon, Dongho Lee, Matheus Ogando do Granja, Md Liakat Ali, Caio Canella Vieira, Yi‐Chen Lee, Emanuel Ferrari do Nascimento, Andrew Scaboo, Melissa Crisel, Scotty Smothers, Michael Clubb, Stewart Selves, Henry T. Nguyen, Zenglu L
  Journal of Plant Registrations.2023; 17(1): 67.     CrossRef
• Controle de soja voluntária em áreas cultivadas com Crotalaria spectabilis
  Gustavo de Souza Oliveira, Guilherme Braga Pereira Braz, Dieimisson Paulo Almeida, Sergio de Oliveira Procópio, Silvio Vasconcelos de Paiva Filho, Matheus de Freitas Souza, Gustavo André Simon
  Revista de Ciências Agroveterinárias.2023; 22(3): 509.     CrossRef
• Breeding for disease resistance in soybean: a global perspective
  Feng Lin, Sushil Satish Chhapekar, Caio Canella Vieira, Marcos Paulo Da Silva, Alejandro Rojas, Dongho Lee, Nianxi Liu, Esteban Mariano Pardo, Yi-Chen Lee, Zhimin Dong, Jose Baldin Pinheiro, Leonardo Daniel Ploper, John Rupe, Pengyin Chen, Dechun Wang, He
  Theoretical and Applied Genetics.2022; 135(11): 3773.     CrossRef
• ‘S16‐14730C’: A high‐yielding conventional soybean cultivar with indeterminate growth habit and multiple disease resistance adapted to the Mid‐South
  P. Chen, G. Shannon, A. Scaboo, M. Crisel, S. Smothers, M. Clubb, S. Selves, C. C. Vieira, M. L. Ali, D. Lee, N. Lord, H. T. Nguyen, Z. Li, M. G. Mitchum, J. Bond, C. Meinhardt, M. Usovsky, S. Li, A. Mengistu, B. Zhang, L. Mozzoni, R. T. Robbins
  Journal of Plant Registrations.2022; 16(2): 287.     CrossRef
• Classification Methods and Identification of Reniform Nematode Resistance in Known Soybean Cyst Nematode-Resistant Soybean Genotypes
  Mariola Usovsky, Robert T. Robbins, Juliet Fultz Wilkes, Devany Crippen, Vijay Shankar, Tri D. Vuong, Paula Agudelo, Henry T. Nguyen
  Plant Disease.2022; 106(2): 382.     CrossRef
• Genome-wide association study for resistance to the Meloidogyne javanica causing root-knot nematode in soybean
  Jean Carlos Alekcevetch, André Luiz de Lima Passianotto, Everton Geraldo Capote Ferreira, Adriana Brombini dos Santos, Danielle Cristina Gregório da Silva, Waldir Pereira Dias, François Belzile, Ricardo Vilela Abdelnoor, Francismar Correa Marcelino-Guimar
  Theoretical and Applied Genetics.2021; 134(3): 777.     CrossRef
• Evaluation of Soybean Germplasm for Resistance to Multiple Nematode Species: Heterodera glycines, Meloidogyne incognita, and Rotylenchulus reniformis
  Mariola Klepadlo, Clinton G. Meinhardt, Tri D. Vuong, Gunvant Patil, Nicole Bachleda, Heng Ye, Robert T. Robbins, Zenglu Li, J. Grover Shannon, Pengyin Chen, Khalid Meksem, Henry T. Nguyen
  Crop Science.2018; 58(6): 2511.     CrossRef
• Quantitative trait loci mapping of Meloidogyne incognita and M. hapla resistance in a recombinant inbred line population of soybean
  Chunjie Li, Jialin Wang, Jia You, Xinpeng Wang, Baohui Liu, Jun Abe, Fanjiang Kong, Congli Wang
  Nematology.2018; 20(6): 525.     CrossRef
• Advancements in breeding, genetics, and genomics for resistance to three nematode species in soybean
  Ki-Seung Kim, Tri D. Vuong, Dan Qiu, Robert T. Robbins, J. Grover Shannon, Zenglu Li, Henry T. Nguyen
  Theoretical and Applied Genetics.2016; 129(12): 2295.     CrossRef

Soybeans have a long history as a nutritious hay and silage crop. Early research extensively investigated forage yield, adaptability to various maturity zones, and nutritional values. Evaluation and breeding with diverse soybean accessions continued to optimize soybean forage yield and quality. There is still interest by breeders in developing more desirable forage soybeans, depending on market demand, and the existing interests of crop and livestock producers. In this review, we provide an update compiled from recent publications on the use and development of soybean as a forage crop.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• Crossing latitude introduction delayed flowering and facilitated dry matter accumulation of soybean as a forage crop
  Dong An, Xingfa Lai, Tianfu Han, Jean Marie Vianney Nsigayehe, Guixin Li, Yuying Shen
  Journal of Integrative Agriculture.2025; 24(4): 1436.     CrossRef
• Intercropping of Soybean and Common Millet—A Rational Way of Forage Biomass Quality Enhancement
  Milena Šenk, Milena Simić, Dušanka M. Milojković-Opsenica, Milan Brankov, Jelena Trifković, Vesna Perić, Vesna Dragičević
  Agriculture.2025; 15(19): 2029.     CrossRef
• Comparative Analysis of Compositional Equivalence in Drought-Tolerant Genetically Modified Soybeans
  Ha-Jung Kang, Hyoun-Min Park, Sung-Dug Oh, Ye-Jin Jang, Jong-Chan Park, Seon-Woo Oh, Sang-Gu Lee, Soo-Yun Park, An-Cheol Chang
  Korean Journal of Breeding Science.2025; 57(4): 445.     CrossRef
• Seed quality under elevated CO2 differs in soybean cultivars with contrasting yield responses
  Anthony Digrado, Christopher M. Montes, Ivan Baxter, Elizabeth A. Ainsworth
  Global Change Biology.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
• Contribution of Photosynthetic, Root and Phenotypic Traits to Soybean Plant Height
  Rongzhen Suo, Mingjiu Wang, Tianqi Zhao
  Sustainability.2024; 16(7): 2886.     CrossRef
• Effect of Growth Stage on Nutrition, Fermentation Quality, and Microbial Community of Semidry Silage from Forage Soybean
  Kexin Wang, Shengnan Sun, Yilin Zou, Yongqi Gao, Zifeng Gao, Bo Wang, Yi Hua, Yalin Lu, Guofu Hu, Ligang Qin
  Plants.2024; 13(5): 739.     CrossRef
• Effects of Harvesting Stages and Additives on the Chemical Composition, Fermentation Quality and Relative Feed Value of Soybean Silages Varieties
  Ahmet Korhan Şahar, Sibel Erdoğan, Şeyda Zorer Çelebi
  Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi.2024; 30(2): 325.     CrossRef
• Chemical Composition of Soybean Harvested in Different Stages of Maturity and Its Suitability for Forage Production
  Vita Sterna, Imants Jansons, Inga Jansone, Margita Damskalne
  Rural Sustainability Research.2023; 50(345): 67.     CrossRef
• Deep associations: the symbiotic relationships between amphipods and large invertebrates from bathyal of the Sea of Okhotsk
  I. N. Marin
  Invertebrate Zoology.2023; 20(1): 108.     CrossRef
• Genome-wide association study for biomass accumulation traits in soybean
  Xin Wang, Shaodong Zhou, Jie Wang, Wenxin Lin, Xiaolei Yao, Jiaqing Su, Haiyang Li, Chao Fang, Fanjiang Kong, Yuefeng Guan
  Molecular Breeding.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
• Seeds of n-GM Soybean Varieties Cultivated in Poland and Their Processing Products as High-Protein Feeds in Cattle Nutrition
  Barbara Niwińska, Kamil Witaszek, Gniewko Niedbała, Krzysztof Pilarski
  Agriculture.2020; 10(5): 174.     CrossRef
• Utilization of Thinned Sunflower and Soybean Intercrops as Forage: A Useful Strategy for Small Scale Farms in Intensive Agricultural Systems
  Heba Sabry Attia Salama, Hassan El-Sayed Khalil, Ali Issa Nawar
  International Journal of Plant Production.2020; 14(3): 487.     CrossRef
• Agronomic Traits and Forage Production in a Mixed-Planting with Corn for Forage Soybean Cultivars, Chookdu 1 and Chookdu 2
  Jin-Dong Seo, Hyun Jo, Minsu Kim, Jong Tae Song, Jeong-Dong Lee
  Plant Breeding and Biotechnology.2019; 7(2): 123.     CrossRef
• Nutritive value and fatty acid content of soybean plant [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] during its growth cycle
  Pier Giorgio Peiretti, Giorgia Meineri, Erica Longato, Sonia Tassone
  Italian Journal of Animal Science.2018; 17(2): 347.     CrossRef
• Harnessing the Potential of Forage Legumes, Alfalfa, Soybean, and Cowpea for Sustainable Agriculture and Global Food Security
  Krishnanand P. Kulkarni, Rupesh Tayade, Sovetgul Asekova, Jong Tae Song, J. Grover Shannon, Jeong-Dong Lee
  Frontiers in Plant Science.2018;[Epub]     CrossRef
• Analysis of Various Quality Attributes of Sunflower and Soybean Plants by Near Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy: Development and Validation Calibration Models
  Uttam Saha, Dinku Endale, P. Glynn Tillman, W. Carroll Johnson, Julia Gaskin, Leticia Sonon, Harry Schomberg, Yuangen Yang
  American Journal of Analytical Chemistry.2017; 08(07): 462.     CrossRef
• Genetic analysis of shoot fresh weight in a cross of wild (G. soja) and cultivated (G. max) soybean
  Sovetgul Asekova, Krishnanand P. Kulkarni, Gunvant Patil, Minsu Kim, Jong Tae Song, Henry T. Nguyen, J. Grover Shannon, Jeong-Dong Lee
  Molecular Breeding.2016;[Epub]     CrossRef
• Evaluation of crude protein, crude oil, total flavonoid, total polyphenol content and DPPH activity in the sprouts from a high oleic acid soybean cultivar
  
  Korean Journal of Agricultural Science.2016;[Epub]     CrossRef
• Determination of forage quality by near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy in soybean
  Sovetgul ASEKOVA, Sang-Ik HAN, Hong-Jib CHOI, Sang-Jo PARK, Dong-Hyun SHIN, Chan-Ho KWON, J. Grover SHANNON, Jeong-Dong LEE
  TURKISH JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY.2016; 40: 45.     CrossRef
• Novel Quantitative Trait Loci for Forage Quality Traits in a Cross between PI 483463 and ‘Hutcheson’ in Soybean
  Sovetgul Asekova, Krishnanand P. Kulkarni, Minsu Kim, Jeong‐Hwa Kim, Jong Tae Song, J. Grover Shannon, Jeong‐Dong Lee
  Crop Science.2016; 56(5): 2600.     CrossRef

Wild soybeans (Glycine soja Sieb. & Zucc.) are generally higher in protein and lower in oil with potential advantages as forage than cultivated soybeans. This study was conducted to evaluate forage yield and quality of wild soybeans. Three wild soybeans were compared to three cultivated soybeans for forage yield and quality at the full bloom stage, full pod stage, and full seed stage (R6) of development. The wild soybeans had significantly lower forage yield than cultivated soybeans at R6 which was determined to be the best stage to harvest based on forage quantity and quality. Wild soybean also had lower crude fat (2.0%) and crude protein (17.7%) concentration than cultivated soybean (5.7 and 21.3%, respectively) at the R6 stage. There were no significant differences for neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber and relative feed value among growth stages between cultivated and wild soybean. The neutral detergent fiber was 40.2 and 40.4%, acid detergent fiber was 26.1% and 27.5%, and relative feed value was 161 and 158 at R6 stage for cultivated and wild soybean, respectively. Wild soybean had less forage yield at harvest time but had similar forage quality comparable to cultivated soybean. However, wild soybeans have smaller and softer stems for potentially improved palatability and feed intake than cultivated soybeans. Therefore, it will be a good genetic source to improve forage characteristics of soybean.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  

• Comparative Analysis of Compositional Equivalence in Drought-Tolerant Genetically Modified Soybeans
  Ha-Jung Kang, Hyoun-Min Park, Sung-Dug Oh, Ye-Jin Jang, Jong-Chan Park, Seon-Woo Oh, Sang-Gu Lee, Soo-Yun Park, An-Cheol Chang
  Korean Journal of Breeding Science.2025; 57(4): 445.     CrossRef
• Contribution of Photosynthetic, Root and Phenotypic Traits to Soybean Plant Height
  Rongzhen Suo, Mingjiu Wang, Tianqi Zhao
  Sustainability.2024; 16(7): 2886.     CrossRef
• Selection of Soybean Germplasm for Mixed Cropping with Corn on the Same Row to Produce Better Yield and Value-Added Forage
  Jin-Dong Seo, Minsu Kim, Yowook Song, Danim Jo, Jong Tae Song, Jong Duk Kim, Chan Ho Kwon, Hyun Jo, Jeong-Dong Lee
  Korean Journal of Breeding Science.2019; 51(1): 1.     CrossRef
• Effects of soybean silage on feeding behavior, performance, and meat quality of lambs
  V.M. Protes, C. Costa, C.M. Pariz, A.M. Castilhos, P.R.L. Meirelles, V.Z. Longhini, R.O. Roça, H.A. Ricardo, V.F.P. Melo
  Small Ruminant Research.2018; 164: 64.     CrossRef
• Genetic analysis of shoot fresh weight in a cross of wild (G. soja) and cultivated (G. max) soybean
  Sovetgul Asekova, Krishnanand P. Kulkarni, Gunvant Patil, Minsu Kim, Jong Tae Song, Henry T. Nguyen, J. Grover Shannon, Jeong-Dong Lee
  Molecular Breeding.2016;[Epub]     CrossRef