Grazing tolerance of alfalfa (<i>Medicago</i> spp.) under continuous and rotational stocking systems in pure stands and in mixture with meadow bromegrass (<i>Bromus riparius</i> Rehm. syn. <i>B. biebersteinii</i> Roem & Schult)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The continuing development of adapted alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) cultivars that combine high yield, disease resistance, winterhardiness, and grazing tolerance is of great value to the beef cattle industry in western Canada. This study evaluated alternative management strategies and plant measurements for assessing the grazing tolerance of alfalfa cultivars over 3 yr. Seven hay-type, four pasture-type, and one dual-purpose (hay or graze) cultivars were established in pure stands and in mixture with meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius Rehm. syn.B. biebersteinii Roem & Schult). Stands were defoliated under continuous or rotational stocking with beef cattle (Bos taurus). Plants we reassessed for winterhardiness, percent alfalfa within row, percent alfalfa cover, basal area and species composition. Continuous stocking resulted in consistent and significant differences between cultivars, whether persistence was measured as percent alfalfa within row, percent cover and basal area, in both pure and mixed stands (P < 0.05). High correlations between measurement techniques (r = 0.74 to 0.99; P < 0.05) confirmed the value of alfalfa within row and alfalfa cover as time and labour efficient methods to evaluate grazing persistence. Competition between alfalfa and meadow bromegrass resulted in a significant confounding effect under rotational stocking (P < 0.05). Winter injury was identified as an important criteria to evaluate for grazing persistence. The most grazing-tolerant genotypes were selected for subsequent breeding efforts to combine winterhardiness, grazing tolerance, and high productivity. This research showed that grazing method, grass competition, and severe winter conditions strongly influence differential survival of alfalfa cultivars under grazing in western Canada. Key words: Alfalfa, grazing tolerance, grazing systems, Medicago sativa L., Medicago falcata L. Arcang, persistence
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".