Abstract
This study investigates the interaction between irradiance and waterlogging injury in alfalfa ( Medicago sativa L.) at various plant developmental stages. Alfalfa was subjected to flooding for 8 to10 d under high or low irradiance levels in controlled environmental chambers. Treatments were imposed on alfalfa 8 and 21 d after planting (DAP) and during regrowth following clipping at 31 DAP. Flooding significantly reduced dry matter accumulation regardless of growth stage, although damage was most severe when flooding was imposed on plants during regrowth after clipping. Irradiance levels primarily affected shoot and root dry matter in 21‐ and 31‐DAP treatments. Much greater shoot dry matter accumulation in nonflooded high irradiance plants was observed relative to low irradiance plants. A flooding × irradiance interaction was found at every growth stage except for root dry weight in the regrowth stage after clipping. The flooding interaction was due to greater injury of flooded high‐irradiance plants relative to flooded low‐irradiance plants when injury was expressed as a percentage of the unflooded control. Results indicate that the irradiance level during flooding can influence damage rating when expressed as a percentage of control. Assimilate supply to roots was sharply reduced by low irradiance as evidenced by reduced root growth and carbohydrate concentration in unflooded controls. Flooding damage, however, was not enhanced under low irradiance, lending support to the hypothesis that carbohydrate (i.e., energy supply) is not a limiting factor in survival of alfalfa roots during short‐duration flooding stress.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Flooding significantly reduced alfalfa dry matter accumulation across growth stages.
- Taxon
- alfalfa
Medicago sativat0 - Treatment
- Floodinge0
- Outcome
- dry matter accumulatione0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Flooding significantly reduced dry matter accumulation regardless of growth stage”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Flooding injury was most severe in alfalfa regrowth after clipping.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Organ / stage
- regrowth after clippinge0
- Outcome
- damagee0
- Direction
- most severee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“damage was most severe when flooding was imposed on plants during regrowth after clipping”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Irradiance affected shoot dry matter in 21- and 31-DAP alfalfa treatments.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Organ / stage
- shoote0
- Treatment
- Irradiance levelse0
- Outcome
- dry mattere0
- Qualifier
- 21‐ and 31‐DAP treatmentse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Irradiance levels primarily affected shoot and root dry matter in 21‐ and 31‐DAP treatments.”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Irradiance affected root dry matter in 21- and 31-DAP alfalfa treatments.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- Irradiance levelse0
- Outcome
- root dry mattere0
- Qualifier
- 21‐ and 31‐DAP treatmentse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Irradiance levels primarily affected shoot and root dry matter in 21‐ and 31‐DAP treatments.”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Under nonflooded conditions, high irradiance yielded greater shoot dry matter than low irradiance.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- high irradiancee0
- Outcome
- shoot dry matter accumulatione0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- nonfloodede0
- Comparator
- low irradiancee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Much greater shoot dry matter accumulation in nonflooded high irradiance plants was observed relative to low irradiance plants.”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Flooding and irradiance interacted at every alfalfa growth stage.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- flooding × irradiancee0
- Outcome
- interactione0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A flooding × irradiance interaction was found at every growth stage except for root dry weight in the regrowth stage after clipping.”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
The flooding–irradiance interaction did not occur for root dry weight in regrowth after clipping.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Organ / stage
- regrowth stage after clippinge0
- Treatment
- flooding × irradiancee0
- Outcome
- root dry weighte0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A flooding × irradiance interaction was found at every growth stage except for root dry weight in the regrowth stage after clipping.”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Relative to unflooded controls, flooded high-irradiance alfalfa had greater percentage injury than flooded low-irradiance plants.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- flooded high‐irradiancee0
- Outcome
- injurye0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- percentage of the unflooded controle0
- Comparator
- flooded low‐irradiance plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“greater injury of flooded high‐irradiance plants relative to flooded low‐irradiance plants when injury was expressed as a percentage of the unflooded control”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Low irradiance reduced root growth in unflooded alfalfa controls.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- low irradiancee0
- Outcome
- root growthe0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- unflooded controlse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“low irradiance as evidenced by reduced root growth and carbohydrate concentration in unflooded controls”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Low irradiance reduced carbohydrate concentration in unflooded alfalfa controls.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- low irradiancee0
- Outcome
- carbohydrate concentratione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- unflooded controlse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“low irradiance as evidenced by reduced root growth and carbohydrate concentration in unflooded controls”
t0“Alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Low irradiance did not enhance flooding damage.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- low irradiancee0
- Outcome
- Flooding damagee0
- Direction
- not enhancede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Flooding damage, however, was not enhanced under low irradiance”
t0“Alfalfa”
The same questions in other papers
flooding · yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ
8 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
- no effect
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →light · pest · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
light · quality: sugar starch · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →light · yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →light · growth · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 papers →flooding · crop injury · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- negative
- negative
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.