Abstract
Incorporating alfalfa into rangelands can enhance the quantity and quality of forage production. We evaluated the impact of clipping timing and selective clipping on two M. falcata (Anik and Yellowhead) and one M. sativa type alfalfas (Vernal) near Mandan, North Dakota, USA. Cultivars were space-planted into an existing mixed grass prairie and clipped at the mid-bud, flower or flower and subsequent vegetative stages. In each clipping treatment, half of the plots had only the alfalfa clipped and half had both the alfalfa and the associated native vegetation clipped. Plots without alfalfa were also included to evaluate the impact of alfalfa on grass and forb biomass. Including Yellowhead increased total productivity by 38 to 185% without lowering the productivity of the grass or forb biomass components. Plots with Yellowhead produced 17 to 26% more total biomass than the next highest entry every year. In 2003 and 2005, alfalfa biomass was increased 1.5 to 2.7 times by clipping only alfalfa in the flower and regrowth stages compared with a mid-bud clipping of only alfalfa. Vernal and Yellowhead generally produced more total biomass when clipping was deferred to the flower stage, but clipping Anik in the mid-bud stage produced as much or more total biomass than did the later clipping treatments. Selective clipping of the alfalfa did not have a consistent impact on yield. Yellowhead appeared to be a good choice for incorporating into rangelands. Producers with Yellowhead or Vernal should consider delaying defoliation until flowering to maximize productivity. Key words: Grazing-type alfalfa, hay-type alfalfa, defoliation timing, biomass productivity
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Including Yellowhead raised total productivity by 38 to 185%.
- Taxon
- alfalfas
Medicago sativat0 - Material
- Yellowheade0
- Treatment
- Including Yellowheade0
- Outcome
- total productivitye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 38 to 185%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Including Yellowhead increased total productivity by 38 to 185% without lowering the productivity of the grass or forb biomass components.”
t0“alfalfas”
Claim · model-written summary
Including Yellowhead did not lower grass or forb productivity.
- Taxon
- alfalfasMedicago sativat0
- Material
- Yellowheade0
- Treatment
- Including Yellowheade0
- Outcome
- productivity of the grass or forb biomass componentse0
- Direction
- without loweringe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Including Yellowhead increased total productivity by 38 to 185% without lowering the productivity of the grass or forb biomass components.”
t0“alfalfas”
Claim · model-written summary
Yellowhead plots produced 17 to 26% more total biomass than the next entry.
- Taxon
- alfalfasMedicago sativat0
- Material
- Yellowheade0
- Outcome
- total biomasse0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 17 to 26%e0
- Comparator
- next highest entrye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plots with Yellowhead produced 17 to 26% more total biomass than the next highest entry every year.”
t0“alfalfas”
Claim · model-written summary
Clipping alfalfa at flower and regrowth stages increased alfalfa biomass 1.5 to 2.7 times compared with mid-bud clipping.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- clipping only alfalfa in the flower and regrowth stagese0
- Outcome
- alfalfa biomasse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 1.5 to 2.7 timese0
- Qualifier
- In 2003 and 2005e0
- Comparator
- mid-bud clipping of only alfalfae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2003 and 2005, alfalfa biomass was increased 1.5 to 2.7 times by clipping only alfalfa in the flower and regrowth stages compared with a mid-bud clipping of only alfalfa.”
Claim · model-written summary
Vernal produced more total biomass when clipping was deferred to flower stage.
- Taxon
- alfalfasMedicago sativat0
- Material
- Vernale0
- Treatment
- clipping was deferred to the flower stagee0
- Outcome
- total biomasse0
- Direction
- moree0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vernal and Yellowhead generally produced more total biomass when clipping was deferred to the flower stage”
t0“alfalfas”
Claim · model-written summary
Yellowhead produced more total biomass when clipping was deferred to flower stage.
- Taxon
- alfalfasMedicago sativat0
- Material
- Yellowheade0
- Treatment
- clipping was deferred to the flower stagee0
- Outcome
- total biomasse0
- Direction
- moree0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vernal and Yellowhead generally produced more total biomass when clipping was deferred to the flower stage”
t0“alfalfas”
Claim · model-written summary
Mid-bud clipping of Anik produced at least as much total biomass as later clipping.
- Taxon
- alfalfasMedicago sativat0
- Material
- Anike0
- Treatment
- clipping Anik in the mid-bud stagee0
- Outcome
- total biomasse0
- Direction
- as much or moree0
- Comparator
- later clipping treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“clipping Anik in the mid-bud stage produced as much or more total biomass than did the later clipping treatments”
t0“alfalfas”
Claim · model-written summary
Selective alfalfa clipping had inconsistent yield effects.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- Selective clippinge0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- did not have a consistent impacte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Selective clipping of the alfalfa did not have a consistent impact on yield.”
Claim · model-written summary
Yellowhead was considered a good choice for rangeland incorporation.
- Taxon
- alfalfasMedicago sativat0
- Material
- Yellowheade0
- Outcome
- incorporating into rangelandse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yellowhead appeared to be a good choice for incorporating into rangelands.”
t0“alfalfas”
Claim · model-written summary
Producers with Yellowhead or Vernal should delay defoliation until flowering.
- Taxon
- alfalfasMedicago sativat0
- Material
- Yellowhead or Vernale0
- Outcome
- delaying defoliation until floweringe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Producers with Yellowhead or Vernal should consider delaying defoliation until flowering to maximize productivity.”
t0“alfalfas”
The same questions in other papers
mechanical · growth · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.