Introduction

Teff Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter is a self-pollinated, annual, warm season grass that is used throughout the world as grain for human consumption and as forage for livestock. The amount of teff produced in the United States is increasing rapidly due to the plant’s popularity as an especially nutritious grain and as high-quality horse hay. The word teff means “lost” because teff seed is the smallest grain in the world, and if you drop it on the ground it will be lost. There are approximately 1.25 million seeds to the pound. That means 150 grains of teff is equal to a single grain of wheat.

Teff is an ancient grain that was believed to have been domesticated in Ethiopia between 4000 and 1000 BC. The grain is still a major component of the diet of millions of individuals from northeast Africa and Asian countries.

When grown as a grain it is normally ground into flour, which is used to make injera, a flat bread eaten with every meal. It is also used as a porridge, similar to cream of wheat or fermented and used to make an alcoholic beverage.

Teff grain does not contain gluten and is an increasingly important dietary component for individuals who suffer from gluten intolerance or Celiac disease.

In the U.S., most of the teff production is used for forage. Over the past five years, the acreage devoted to teff production has exploded, and teff is currently grown in at least 25 states across the nation.

Although the acreage devoted to grain production in the U.S. is small, increasing demands for teff grain by African immigrants and gluten intolerant individuals is driving the expansion of acreage for this purpose.

Nearly 4,000 varieties or cultivars of teff have been identified in Ethiopia. The United States Department of Agriculture’s Agriculture Research Service Plant Germplasm Introduction and Testing Research Station (PGITRS) laboratory in Prosser, Wash., has nearly 400 numbered cultivars. Most of these cultivars have not been formally evaluated for grain or biomass production potential over large geographic areas. Therefore, information about production potentials of the various cultivars is very limited. The purpose of this study was to quantify biomass production potential of 15 teff cultivars in western Nevada.

Methods

The PGITRS supplied 12 varieties of teff that ranged in color from dark brown to white (Table 1). A dark brown and white variety was supplied by a representative of a teff marketing firm, and the variety “Dessie” was selected as a control. Approximately 2 grams of each variety was available from the PGITR, which limited the size of test plots.

Table 1. Seed source and characteristics for 15 teff varieties tested in Fallon, Nevada

Teff seed source and characteristics
Accession Number Seed Color Trial # Source % germ
PI 193508 Lt Brown 1 USDA 86
PI 193514 Brown/Wt 2 USDA 82
PI 195932 Lt Brown 3 USDA 82
PI 273889 Lt Brown 4 USDA 82
PI 329680 Brown/Wt 5 USDA 82
PI 347632 Brown/Wt 6 USDA 94
PI 494366 Dk Brown 7 USDA 82
PI 494432 White 8 USDA 92
PI 494433 White 9 USDA 96
PI 494465 White 10 USDA 88
PI 494479 Brown 11 USDA 96
PI 557457 Dk Brown 12 USDA 98
UK brown Dk Brown 13 Ethiopia ?
UK white White 14 Ethiopia ?
Dessie Dk Brown 15 Idaho ?

The trial was located on a Dia loam soil as described in the U.S Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey of the Fallon, Fernley area. The land had previously been used to produce alfalfa. The trial was arranged in a randomized, complete block design with three replications of each variety planted. The total plot area allocated to each variety was 4 feet by 8 feet (32 ft sq.) with a 20- square-foot (3 feet by 6.7 feet) seeded area within each plot. This design resulted in a 1 foot unseeded border between plots and 1.3-foot border between rows. These areas were generally kept free of all vegetation to clearly define the different varieties and reduce competition.

The plot area was plowed, disced, and leveled prior to seeding on June 4, 2009. Seeding was accomplished by hand using a common salt shaker with all but three of the holes in the lid being plugged. The seeding rate was equivalent to 3 pounds per acre (.023 oz/plot) with the seed distributed evenly over each seeded plot. All plots were firmed after seeding by systematically walking on all areas within the plots. The area surrounding the plots was seeded with a 15-foot-wide border of common barley to facilitate weed control. The plots were flood irrigated beginning June 13, 2009 and then on a regular basis until harvest began during September 2009. The plots were sprayed with 2,4-D LV 4 at .94 lbs/acre acid equivalent during the tillered stage of growth (July 9, 2009) to control broadleaved weeds and volunteer alfalfa. Plots were subsequently hand weeded on a regular basis to control grass weeds until harvest.

The plots were monitored weekly. We recorded date(s) when the boot stage and full heading occurred for each variety. Harvest began when seed heads were mature.

Prior to harvest, information on average plant height and panicle length was collected. We also recorded the stage of maturity and whether the plant had lodged (fallen over). Harvest consisted of clipping the entire plot at ground level using a gas-powered hedge trimmer. The resulting biomass was immediately weighed and a grab sample was obtained from each plot. The grab sample was weighed, placed in a paper bag and subsequently dried in a microwave oven until the weight stabilized. The percent moisture and total dry matter was calculated following the drying process. Wet weights from each plot were then adjusted to a 100 percent dry matter basis with the final results displayed in tons/acre for each variety. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on the variety means with mean separation at the <0.05 level.

Results and Discussion

The results of the biomass trial and plant characteristics are displayed in table 2.

Table 2. Teff variety characteristics, growth stages, plant status and dry biomass yields during 2009

Teff characteristics and biomass trial results
Plant Accession Number/Name Boot Stage(Date) Full Seed Head Emerged (Date) Average Plant Ht. at Harvest (Inches) Ave.Panicle Length at Harvest(Inches) Harvest (Date) Plant Status (WhenHarvested) Ave. Biomass Production (tons/acre 100% dry matter)
193508 7-30-09 9-2-09 36 12 9-28-09 Lodged 9.4 a*
494465 8-19-09 9-10-09 30 10 10-11-09 Immature 8.3 ab
347632 8-11-09 9-2-09 40 15 10-2-09 Lodged 8.0 abc
494432 7-26-09 8-8-09 50 21 9-28-09 Lodged 7.8 abc
193514 8-7-09 9-2-09 41 15 10-11-09 Lodged 7.4 abcd
273889 8-19-09 9-2-09 36 15 10-2-09 Lodged 7.2 abcd
494479 8-19-09 9-2-09 40 17 10-12-09 Upright 7.0 abcd
Uk. Brown 7-30-09 8-19-09 35 16 10-15-09 Upright 6.6 cde
329680 8-19-09 9-2-09 40 12 10-11-09 Upright 6.5 cde
Dessie 7-24-09 8-8-09 36 11.5 9-25-09 Lodged 5.6 cdef
195932 8-19-09 9-2-09 32 16 10-11-09 Upright 5.5 cdef
494366 7-07-09 7-22-09 28 12 9-25-09 Upright 4.9 def
557457 7-26-09 8-8-09 33 16 10-14-09 Lodged 4.8 def
Uk. White 7-30-09 8-19-09 35 16 10-15-09 Upright 4.7 ef
494433 8-19-09 9-10-09 30 16 10-11-09 Immature 4.5 f

* Biomass yields followed by the same letters are not significantly different from other varieties at the P< 0.05 level using Tukey’s HSD mean separation.

Note: Lodged plants are plants that have fallen over prior to harvest. Lodged plants prohibit direct harvest using a combine.

Large differences occurred among some varieties, as expected. The top seven varieties produced between 7 and 9 tons of dry matter, while the bottom six produced less than six tons per acre. The control variety, “Dessie,” which has often been used as a forage source, was in the lower 50 percent of the varieties tested. The top variety, # 193508, produced over twice as much dry matter as the worst performing variety, # 494433. Seed color and yields appear to be independent of biomass yields (UNCE Fact Sheet #10-36), as does maturity when harvested. The second highest yielder and lowest yielding variety were rated as immature when harvested.

This trial demonstrates the wide variety of yields that can be expected from different varieties of teff. A producer wishing to grow teff as a forage source is advised to conduct small scale trials on unknown varieties or plant commercial varieties that have proven to be high biomass producers in their area.

Additional resources

Assefa, K., H. Tefera, A. Merker, T. Kefyalew and F. Hundera. 2001. Variability, heritability and genetic advance in pheno-morphic and agronomic traits of tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter germplasm from eight regions of Ethiopia. Hereditas 134:103- 113.

Curtis, K.R., J. Entsminger, M. Cowee, J. Davison, and T. Harris. 2008. Market Potential for Nevada Teff Products. University Center for Economic Development (UCED) publication 2008/09-02. 38 pages.

Ketema, S. 1997. Tef. Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter. Promoting the Conservation and Use of Underutilized and Neglected Crops. Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, Gatersleben/International Plant Genetics Resources Institute, Rome Italy.

National Academy of Sciences. 1996. Teff. pp 215-235 In: Lost Crops of Africa. Vol. 1. Grains. Natl. Acad. Sci., Washington D.C.

Stallknecht, G.F., K.M. Gilbertson and J.L. Eckoff. 1993. Teff: Food Crop for Humans and Animals. pp. 231-234. In: J. Jamick and J.E. Simon (eds.), New Crops. Wiley and Sons, New York.

Tefera, H. and S. Ketema. 2001. Production and importance of tef in Ethiopian Agriculture pp 3-7. In: Tefera, H.; G. Belay and M. Sorrells (eds.) Narrowing the Rift: Tef Research and Development. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Tef Genetics and Improvement, 16-19 October 2000, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Davison, J. and Laca, M. 2010, Biomass Production of 15 Teff Varieties Grown in Churchill County, Nevada During 2009, Extension | University of Nevada, Reno, FS-10-34

Authors of this scholarly work are no longer available.

Please contact Extension's Communication Team for assistance.

 

Also of Interest:

 
burger
Eating Healthy at Restaurants - Choose healthy items no matter where you dine
Making healthier choices at restaurants can make all the difference to maintain a healthy energy balance .
Lindsay, A., Buffington, A. 2021, Extension | University of Nevada, Reno, FS-21-101
eating samores
Go, Slow, and Whoa Foods
We can help our children recognize which foods are better choices with GO, SLOW and WHOA.
Buffington, A. and Lindsay, A. 2021, Extension | University of Nevada, FS-21-86
Parent and Child grocery shopping
Healthy Tips for Families: Lifelong Healthy Habits Start at Home.
Today’s children have different options for food and play than children had in the past. Sadly, many food choices contain more calories and fewer nutrients than a child needs to grow healthy. Try these 10 tips to help your family!
Lindsay, A., Buffington, A. 2021, Extension | University of Nevada, Reno, FS-21-100
eating her vegetables
Healthy Tips For Picky Eaters
Exploring Food: How to Explore New Food with Preschoolers
Lindsay, A., & Buffington, A. 2021, Extension | University of Nevada, Reno, FS-21-102
dinner with parents
Kids Win When Family Meals Are A Priority
Make Mealtime Quality Time
Buffington, A. and Lindsay, A. 2021, Extension | University of Nevada, Reno, FS-21-89