Abstract
Abstract Soil acidity is believed to be an important cause of limited root penetration and low herbage yields of alfalfa ( Medicago sativa L.). Alfalfa was seeded into an orchardgrass ( Dactylis glomerata L.) sod to evaluate the influence of surface‐applied limestone on alfalfa growth under acidic soil conditions. Alfalfa was planted without tillage in April of 1981 and 1982 on an Ernest silt loam soil (fine‐loamy, mixed, mesic Aquic Fragiudult). Dolomitic agricultural limestone was surface applied at 0 or 6.7 kg ha −1 either 8 or 20 months before or at planting. Yield (from 1982 through 1984) increases, greater than two‐fold, resulted from surface application of limestone. Time of lime application had no influence on yields. Roots were more prevalent at the 1.0‐ and 1.5‐m depths due to surface limestone application. Soil pH (0‐ to 10‐cm depth) ranged from 6.4 to 6.9 in the surface limed plots as compared to 5.3 to 5.9 in the unlimed plots. The pH averaged 5.1 at and below the 45‐cm depth irrespective of limestone application. Exchangeable Al ranged from 22 mg kg −1 at the 0‐ to 5‐cm depth to 186 mg kg −1 at the 145‐ to 150‐cm depth on unlimed plots. Lime application reduced Al 2‐ to 20‐fold in the upper 15 cm, but had no influence on Al concentrations at depths of 95 cm and greater.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 9
Claim · model-written summary
Surface application of limestone increased alfalfa yield more than two-fold (1982 through 1984).
- Taxon
- Alfalfa
Medicago sativat0 - Treatment
- surface application of limestonee0
- Outcome
- Yielde0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Value
- greater than two‐folde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield (from 1982 through 1984) increases, greater than two‐fold, resulted from surface application of limestone”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Time of lime application had no influence on alfalfa yields.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- Time of lime applicatione0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- no influencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Time of lime application had no influence on yields”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Alfalfa roots were more prevalent at the 1.0 and 1.5 m depths because of surface limestone application.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- surface limestone applicatione0
- Outcome
- Rootse0
- Direction
- more prevalente0
- Qualifier
- at the 1.0‐ and 1.5‐m depthse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Roots were more prevalent at the 1.0‐ and 1.5‐m depths due to surface limestone application”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil pH at 0 to 10 cm depth ranged from 6.4 to 6.9 in surface-limed plots compared with 5.3 to 5.9 in unlimed plots.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- surface limed plotse0
- Outcome
- Soil pHe0
- Direction
- higherinferrede0
- Value
- 6.4 to 6.9e0
- Qualifier
- 5.3 to 5.9e0
- Comparator
- unlimed plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil pH (0‐ to 10‐cm depth) ranged from 6.4 to 6.9 in the surface limed plots as compared to 5.3 to 5.9 in the unlimed plots”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil pH averaged 5.1 at and below the 45 cm depth irrespective of limestone application.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- limestone applicatione0
- Outcome
- pHe0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
- Value
- 5.1e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The pH averaged 5.1 at and below the 45‐cm depth irrespective of limestone application”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
On unlimed plots exchangeable Al was 22 mg/kg at the 0 to 5 cm depth.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Outcome
- Exchangeable Ale0
- Value
- 22 mg kg −1e0
- Qualifier
- at the 0‐ to 5‐cm depthe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Exchangeable Al ranged from 22 mg kg −1 at the 0‐ to 5‐cm depth to 186 mg kg −1 at the 145‐ to 150‐cm depth on unlimed plots”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
On unlimed plots exchangeable Al was 186 mg/kg at the 145 to 150 cm depth.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Outcome
- Exchangeable Ale0
- Value
- 186 mg kg −1e0
- Qualifier
- at the 145‐ to 150‐cm depth on unlimed plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Exchangeable Al ranged from 22 mg kg −1 at the 0‐ to 5‐cm depth to 186 mg kg −1 at the 145‐ to 150‐cm depth on unlimed plots”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Lime application reduced exchangeable Al 2- to 20-fold in the upper 15 cm.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- Lime applicatione0
- Outcome
- Ale0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 2‐ to 20‐folde0
- Qualifier
- upper 15 cme0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lime application reduced Al 2‐ to 20‐fold in the upper 15 cm”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Lime application had no influence on Al concentrations at depths of 95 cm and greater.
- Taxon
- AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- Lime applicatione0
- Outcome
- Al concentrationse0
- Direction
- no influencee0
- Qualifier
- depths of 95 cm and greatere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lime application reduced Al 2‐ to 20‐fold in the upper 15 cm, but had no influence on Al concentrations at depths of 95 cm and greater”
t0“Alfalfa”
The same questions in other papers
calcium oxide · growth · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
calcium oxide · yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
lime · yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 41 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
46 papers more in this group
See all 50 papers →lime · nutrient: content · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
25 papers more in this group
See all 29 papers →lime · soil: chemistry · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results agree
9 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.