The influence of harvest management and fertilizers on herbage yields of cool-season grasses grown in the Aspen Parkland of northeastern Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to evaluate the impact of harvest and fertilizer management on the herbage yield of various grass cultivars grown in the Aspen Parkland region of northeastern Saskatchewan. A series of three experiments were set out: site 1 at Pathlow, Gray Luvisolic soil, 1980; site 2 at Melfort, Deep Black Chernozemic soil, 1979; and site 3 at Pathlow, 1986. At site 1, the design was a split-split plot with fertilizer treatments as mainplots (unfertilized and fertilized, initially with 11N-22P kg ha−1 incorporated 5 cm into soil and thereafter, 50N-13P kg ha−1 broadcast each year). Ten grass cultivars were seeded as subplots and harvest systems as subsubplots (two-cut and four-cut). At site 2 Melfort, the experimental design was similar to site 1, but without the fertilizer treatments. Fertilizer was applied to all plots at the same rates as site 1. At site 3, Pathlow, 14 grass cultivars were seeded with the same experimental design as site 2, but 10 kg S ha−1 was applied each year with the N and P fertilizer. At site 1 Pathlow, the only experiment with the unfertilized control, fertilizer increased the average herbage yield to 2.47 t ha−1 from 1.42 t ha−1 for unfertilized control plots. Frequent cutting (four-cut system) showed reduced annual yields of 1.70, 5.28 and 1.93 t ha−1 compared with 2.19, 7.08, and 2.87 t ha−1 (two-cut system), respectively, for sites 1, 2 (5-yr period) and 3 (7-yr period). A greater response to fertilizer was observed with the 2-cut system, 1.19 t ha−1, than with the four-cut system, 0.91 t ha−1, which resulted in a fertilizer × cutting management interaction at site 1. With some exceptions, most of the species were not significantly different in ranking based on herbage yield over the three test sites, but meadow bromegrass [Bromus biebersteinii (Roem & Schult.)] ranked higher in yield on the less fertile Pathlow Gray Wooded soil sites than on the more fertile Melfort Deep Black soil site. Crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum L.) ranked high in herbage yield at all three sites. Crested wheatgrass, smooth bromegrass (Bromus inermis Leyss.) and meadow bromegrass, the most commonly grown species in Saskatchewan, yielded well under the simulated hay and pasture conditions. Other cultivars such as Clarke intermediate wheatgrass [(Elytrigia intermedia (Host) Nevski], Elbee northern wheatgrass [Elymus lanceolatur (Scribn. and Smith)] and Lodorm green needlegrass (Stripa viridula Trin.) should be considered for pasture and hay by farmers and ranchers in northern Saskatchewan. Key words: Grass, harvest management, pasture, hay, fertilizer
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".