Urochloa (Brachiaria) hybrid forage grasses for grazing and fodder markets

High-biomass pasture that animals digest easily

This technology is a set of improved Urochloa (syn. Brachiaria) hybrid forage grasses for high biomass and good digestibility in livestock systems: Mulato II, Cobra, Cayman, and Camello. The Urochloa forage grasses are high-yielding hybrid grasses that provides abundant, good-quality feed for livestock such as cattle, sheep, and goats. They are perennial species, so once well-established does not require replanting every season and, with good management, they can remain productive for more than 10 years. The grasses can be grazed directly by animals, cut and fed fresh, or conserved as hay by drying. In areas where weather conditions do not allow proper drying, they can also be preserved as silage.

This technology is pre-validated.

Scaling readiness: idea maturity 9/9; level of use unknown

Positive impacts: 8

Target groups	Positive impacts
Women in male-headed households (insecure land rights), responsible for fodder	Save time when forage is produced near home; earn income from fodder/cuttings; possible increase in joint decision-making.
Female-headed households (widows/divorced), small land size	More control over milk/hay sales; diversified income; better feed security.
Youth (women/men) with little land, underemployment/migration	Jobs and small businesses (planting material, cutting, baling, transport, sales); skills development and service provision.
Agro-pastoralists/pastoralists (collective tenure), dry zones	Better dry-season resilience (fodder banks); fewer livestock losses in the dry season.
Peri-urban “zero-grazing” smallholders (often women: feeding/milking)	Lower purchased feed costs; more stable feeding; more regular milk income.
Wealthier/commercial producers and cooperative leaders	Faster adoption (irrigation/mechanization); stronger hay/seed markets; higher productivity.
Landless farm workers (daily laborers), often women	More paid work during land prep, weeding, cutting, baling; seasonal income.
Remote areas / marginalized groups (weak extension, strong land norms)	Women’s groups can access seed/cuttings and sell; improved animal feeding.

More...

Unintended impacts: 8
Mitigations: 8

Barriers: 8
Mitigations: 8

Climate adaptability: Highly adaptable

Works well where it is adapted in warm humid and subhumid tropical and sub-tropical environments

Farmer climate change readiness: Significant improvement

Forage and livestock producers benefit in quality forage for their animals including in relatively marginal areas

Biodiversity: Positive impact on biodiversity

Creates micro-environment support thriving biodiversity

Carbon footprint: Much less carbon released

Reduces emission a lot through C sequestration through roots turnover, especially that they are perennial grasses

Environmental health: Greatly improves environmental health

Reduces soil erosion and provide soil cover, fixes carbon through roots turnover.

Soil quality: Improves soil health and fertility

Improves soil structure and carbon. Reduces soil erosion keeping the productive topsoil in place.

Water use: Same amount of water used

The grasses have competitive productivity water use efficiency. The grasses accumulate appreciable amount of biomass per unit of water utilized

Problem

Dry-season feed shortages that reduce livestock productivity and household income.
Low milk and meat output caused by poor-quality forage and weak feeding systems.
High feeding costs that push farmers to buy expensive feed or reduce herd size.
Weak fodder value chains (limited hay/silage production and storage), reducing resilience and income options.
Hard production conditions (acidic soils, drought-prone zones, or wet areas), where the right hybrid can improve forage supply and support climate-smart livelihoods.

Solution

A practical forage package that farmers can use for grazing, cut-and-carry, and hay/silage.
Creates livelihoods through seed supply, hay making, and fodder services (women/youth opportunities).
Strengthens resilience by enabling dry-season feed storage.
Easy to scale through demos, training, and farmer groups.

Key points to design your program

Urochloa forage grass hybrids (Mulato II, Cobra, Cayman, Camello) provide a practical solution to key livestock challenges in Sub-Saharan Africa, especially dry-season feed shortages, low animal productivity, and weak fodder supply systems. These hybrids help farmers produce high biomass, good-quality feed that can be used for grazing, cut-and-carry feeding, and hay/silage, while supporting better milk and meat production.

These hybrids support several Sustainable Development Goals: SDG 1 by increasing incomes through improved livestock productivity and fodder businesses (seed and hay); SDG 2 by improving food and nutrition security through more reliable milk and meat supply; SDG 13 by strengthening climate resilience through more stable feed availability across seasons; and SDG 15 by supporting sustainable land management where improved pastures reduce bare soil and erosion.

As part of the TAAT e-catalog and technology toolkits, these hybrids complement innovations such as improved pasture establishment (fine seedbed, shallow sowing), weed control during establishment, fertility management (DAP at planting and nitrogen top-dressing to support regrowth), and fodder conservation (hay/silage) to secure dry-season feed. This package helps projects move beyond short-term feed relief toward more sustainable livestock feeding systems.

Developed and promoted by Alliance Bioversity International & CIAT (Tropical Forages Program), the hybrids can be introduced through development programs that combine quality seed access, demonstration plots, training for extension services and farmers, support to women and youth fodder enterprises, and market linkages to dairy hubs, fattening zones, and livestock cooperatives to drive adoption and sustained use.

This technology is ideal for development initiatives aiming to improve livestock productivity, climate resilience, and rural livelihoods. With TAAT and partner support, Urochloa hybrids offer a reliable pathway to strengthen local feed systems and reduce dry-season feeding crises.

Cost vs. revenue

Data reliability of this estimate: 100 %

Return on investment 680 %

Every USD invested returns USD 6.8 net income.

Detailed financial information ›

IP

Plant variety protection

Positive impact 8

Target groups	Positive impacts
Women in male-headed households (insecure land rights), responsible for fodder	Save time when forage is produced near home; earn income from fodder/cuttings; possible increase in joint decision-making.
Female-headed households (widows/divorced), small land size	More control over milk/hay sales; diversified income; better feed security.
Youth (women/men) with little land, underemployment/migration	Jobs and small businesses (planting material, cutting, baling, transport, sales); skills development and service provision.
Agro-pastoralists/pastoralists (collective tenure), dry zones	Better dry-season resilience (fodder banks); fewer livestock losses in the dry season.
Peri-urban “zero-grazing” smallholders (often women: feeding/milking)	Lower purchased feed costs; more stable feeding; more regular milk income.
Wealthier/commercial producers and cooperative leaders	Faster adoption (irrigation/mechanization); stronger hay/seed markets; higher productivity.
Landless farm workers (daily laborers), often women	More paid work during land prep, weeding, cutting, baling; seasonal income.
Remote areas / marginalized groups (weak extension, strong land norms)	Women’s groups can access seed/cuttings and sell; improved animal feeding.

Unintended impact 8

Target groups	Unintended impacts	Mitigation measures
Women in male-headed households (insecure land rights)	Workload shifts to women/girls (cutting/transport); income may be captured by others; overall overload.	Promote labor-saving tools (choppers, carts) and shared labor; use women-managed group sales/payments; include household dialogue on benefit sharing.
Female-headed households (small land size)	Overwork due to limited labor; weaker access to equipment/markets; risk of local capture.	Group labor arrangements; access to hired services (cutting/chopping/baling); collective marketing and transparent payments.
Youth with little land	Benefits captured by elders/elites; jobs can be hard/unstable; exclusion without capital.	Transparent selection and youth quotas; starter kits/credit + coaching; fair wage guidance and safer working conditions.
Agro-pastoralists/pastoralists (collective tenure)	Enclosure/privatization; conflicts over access; commons displaced; inequality within community (gender/age).	Participatory land-use agreements; community by-laws with women/youth representation; local conflict-resolution mechanisms.
Peri-urban zero-grazing (often women)	More daily cutting (especially in cut-and-carry systems); “food vs fodder” land conflict; workload increase.	Promote small high-yield plots and efficient cutting schedules; labor-saving chopping; integrate fodder planning with household food production.
Wealthier/commercial producers & coop leaders	Capture of subsidies/certified seed; land pressure; market power against smallholders.	Targeting rules for support; transparent distribution; inclusive contracting with smallholders; monitor elite capture risks.
Landless workers (often women)	Drudgery; herbicide exposure; unequal pay; no protection.	PPE + safe herbicide training; enforce basic labor standards; grievance channels; encourage mechanized services where feasible.
Remote/marginalized groups	Spread of low-quality seed; women excluded from land/markets; inequalities reinforced.	Quality assurance and certified supply channels; inclusive community sensitization; women’s group market linkages and safeguards.

Barriers 8

Target groups	Barriers to adoption	Mitigation measures
Women in male-headed households (insecure land rights)	Limited land access and decisions; low coop membership; limited seed/finance access; hard cutting/chopping work.	Secure dedicated plots via community/household agreements; support women’s groups/coops; seed vouchers + small credit; tool banks (choppers/carts).
Female-headed households (small land size)	Land size/tenure; credit constraints; limited labor; limited access to quality seed/inputs.	Small-plot packages; credit guarantees/savings groups; paid services for labor peaks; strengthen seed access points.
Youth with little land	Land access; capital/equipment; market networks; training gaps.	Lease community plots; equipment rental hubs; incubation + training; buyer linkages (dairy/fattening zones).
Agro-pastoralists/pastoralists (collective tenure)	Limited access to adapted seed; weak local governance; few services; distant markets.	Decentralized seed supply; mobile extension; strengthen local governance rules; aggregation/transport support.
Peri-urban zero-grazing	Severe land constraint; need practical advice; seed must be timely and affordable.	Micro-plot approaches; short coaching + demos; pre-rain seed distribution; affordable starter packs.
Wealthier/commercial producers & coop leaders	Fewer constraints; mainly regulatory clarity and seed quality.	Clear licensing/quality standards; enforce seed quality control and traceability.
Landless workers (often women)	No decision power; low access to training/PPE; job insecurity.	Include workers in safety/training; ensure PPE access; formalize service groups (cutting/baling teams) with fair terms.
Remote/marginalized groups	Isolation and transport costs; low access to seed/training; weak market outlets.	Local seed points; mobile trainings; transport/logistics support; collective marketing through groups/coops.

Cost of the investment Sum of all fixed and operational expenses.	USD 2,616 Per hectare over 10 years
Gross revenue Sum of all income before subtracting costs.	USD 20,400 Per hectare over 10 years
Net income Gross revenue minus total cost.	USD 17,784 Per hectare over 10 years
Return on investment Percentage of income earned for each dollar invested, calculated as: (income ÷ cost of investment) × 100	680 % Over 10 years

References:

Drought-resilient Urochloa forage for year-round livestock feeding_CostRevenueROI_Date.pdf (PDF, 60.43 KB)

Countries with a green colour: Tested & adopted
Countries with a bright green colour: Adopted
Countries with a yellow colour: Tested
Countries with a blue colour: Testing ongoing

Countries where the technology is being tested or has been tested and adopted
Country	Testing ongoing	Tested	Adopted
Ethiopia	–No ongoing testing	Tested	–Not adopted
Kenya	–No ongoing testing	–Not tested	Adopted
Rwanda	–No ongoing testing	Tested	–Not adopted
Tanzania	–No ongoing testing	Tested	–Not adopted

This technology can be used in the colored agro-ecological zones. Any zones shown in white are not suitable for this technology.

Agro-ecological zones where this technology can be used
AEZ	Subtropic - warm	Subtropic - cool	Tropic - warm	Tropic - cool
Arid	–	–	–	–
Semiarid		–		–
Subhumid		–		–
Humid		–		–

Source: HarvestChoice/IFPRI 2009

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals that are applicable to this technology.

Goal 1: no poverty

Higher livestock productivity and new income options (seed and hay businesses)

Goal 2: zero hunger

More reliable milk and meat production because feed is available across seasons

Goal 5: gender equality

Opportunities for women and youth in seed/hay value chains, and less time pressure when feed is produced closer to home

Goal 10: reduced inequalities

Time savings for women can reduce workload gaps and support participation in income activities

Goal 13: climate action

Better feed availability during dry periods and climate shocks, reducing vulnerability of livestock systems

Site selection and land preparation
Choose a well-drained field and prepare a clean, fine seedbed (the seeds are small). If the field has tough weeds (e.g., couch grass), herbicide spraying is advised. Plough to about 25 cm and harrow to get a fine tilth; if possible, avoid very sloping or uneven land.
Planting (start of the rainy season)
Start planting when rains have started well. The factsheet notes that seeding can begin after about 30 mm of rainfall.
Seeding rate and method (hybrids)
Use about 7–10 kg of seed per hectare (your hybrid note). From the factsheet, you can apply it as: Row planting: rows 40–50 cm apart (around 8 kg/ha). Broadcast sowing: about 10–12 kg/ha.
Cover the seed lightly (do not bury deep)
After sowing, cover the seed lightly (e.g., with a harrow). On small plots, use tree branches or large brooms to cover seeds with soil. Keep seed depth around 1–2 cm (do not exceed 2 cm).
Weed control during establishment
Keep the plot free of weeds during the first 6–8 weeks so the grass can establish well (from your draft text).
Fertilisation / manure
At planting, apply a phosphorus-dominated fertilizer (DAP) to support root development. Then apply CAN at 100 kg/ha per year; apply after rains and ideally after harvesting when the soil is wet to support regrowth. In poor soils, farmers can also top up with manure.
First cut or first grazing
For the hybrids, first use is after about 70–80 days (your hybrid note + confirmed in the factsheet for hybrids).
Regular harvesting / grazing schedule (help the grass recover)
Once well established, follow a rotation so the grass recovers and stays good for animals: 25–45 days in the rainy season, and 60–70 days in the dry season.