Paper · 2020 · International Journal of Agriculture and Biology

Changes in Yield and Forage Quality of Six Alfalfa Cultivars in Response to Sustainable Irrigation with Treated Wastewater

Walid Soufan; Nasser Al-Suhaibani; Peter Tillmann; et al.

5
claims
7
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Sustainable usage of water resources becomes a necessity in the recent years because of the increased pressure on these resources resulted from climate change events e.g., intensive droughts.Irrigation of forage crops consumes vast amounts of ground water in arid and semi-arid areas.Therefore, vast research efforts are being invested to find alternative sources of freshwater suitable for irrigation.The aim of this study was to examine the potential of using treated wastewater in sustainable irrigation of alfalfa for forage production and the effect of this type of water on productivity and forage quality of alfalfa plants comparing to irrigation with normal water.Six different cultivars (Hassawi, Egyptian local, Cuf 101, Server, WG CAL 10 and Saltine) were grown in two different seasons (2013-2014 and 2014-2015).Regardless of cultivar and/or cultivation season, irrigation with treated wastewater did not adversely affect the productivity of alfalfa plants.Moreover, irrigation with treated wastewater did not show any adverse effects on forage quality of alfalfa plants with slight decrease in protein and fat contents in comparison with plants irrigated with normal water.In conclusion, alfalfa forage crop can be successfully grown with treated wastewater.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Treated wastewater did not adversely affect alfalfa productivity across cultivars and seasons.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Treatment
irrigation with treated wastewatere0
Outcome
productivitye0
Direction
did not adversely affecte0
Comparator
irrigation with normal watere1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation with treated wastewater did not adversely affect the productivity of alfalfa plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 874–968 · show in text ↑
e1

“comparing to irrigation with normal water”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 630–671 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Treated wastewater did not adversely affect overall alfalfa forage quality.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Treatment
irrigation with treated wastewatere0
Outcome
forage qualitye0
Direction
did not show any adverse effectse0
Comparator
plants irrigated with normal watere1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation with treated wastewater did not show any adverse effects on forage quality of alfalfa plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 979–1082 · show in text ↑
e1

“plants irrigated with normal water”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1151–1185 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Treated wastewater slightly decreased alfalfa forage protein content relative to normal water.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Treatment
irrigation with treated wastewatere0
Outcome
proteine0
Direction
slight decreasee0
Comparator
plants irrigated with normal watere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation with treated wastewater did not show any adverse effects on forage quality of alfalfa plants with slight decrease in protein and fat contents in comparison with plants irrigated with normal water”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 979–1185 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Treated wastewater slightly decreased alfalfa forage fat content relative to normal water.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Treatment
irrigation with treated wastewatere0
Outcome
fat contentse0
Direction
slight decreasee0
Comparator
plants irrigated with normal watere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation with treated wastewater did not show any adverse effects on forage quality of alfalfa plants with slight decrease in protein and fat contents in comparison with plants irrigated with normal water”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 979–1185 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that alfalfa forage can be grown with treated wastewater.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Outcome
can be successfully grown with treated wastewatere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“alfalfa forage crop can be successfully grown with treated wastewater”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1201–1270 · show in text ↑

irrigation · yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ

92 papers: 66 positive, 26 negative or no effect

25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 66 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

88 papers more in this group

See all 92 papers →

irrigation · quality: protein · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 5 positive, 7 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

irrigation · quality: grain · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 6 positive, 8 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 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.