Alternatives to Timothy Grown in Mixture with Alfalfa in Eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Core Ideas Mixtures of alfalfa with meadow fescue, tall fescue, or meadow bromegrass have comparable yields and persistence to alfalfa‐timothy. Mixtures with festulolium or perennial ryegrass had lower total seasonal DM yields than the alfalfa‐timothy mixture. Harvesting mixtures at the alfalfa early flower stage maximizes the estimated milk production per ha. Timothy (Phleum pratense L.) is the main forage grass species cultivated with alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) in eastern Canada, yet its regrowth under dry and warm conditions is poor. Air temperature and water stress are predicted to increase in the near future, which could further reduce timothy’s regrowth. We evaluated six alfalfa–grass binary mixtures at three contrasted sites in eastern Canada to find potential alternatives to the alfalfa–timothy mixture under current climatic conditions. Timothy, tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus [Schreb.] Dumort.), meadow fescue (Schedonorus pratensis [Huds.] P. Beauv.), festulolium (× Festulolium Asch. & Graebn), perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.), and meadow bromegrass (Bromus biebersteinii Roem. & Schult.) were evaluated with harvests either at the early bud or early flower stage of alfalfa. Dry matter yield, nutritive attributes, and the yield contribution of each species were determined. Alfalfa mixtures with festulolium (cv. Spring Green) and perennial ryegrass (cv. Remington) had inferior grass yield contributions due to winter damages, as well as inferior forage yield and estimated milk production per hectare; these cultivars are not currently viable alternatives to timothy in eastern Canada. In contrast, alfalfa–meadow fescue and alfalfa–meadow bromegrass mixtures produced comparable yields, nutritive value, and estimated milk production per hectare and they are, therefore, possible alternatives to the alfalfa‐timothy mixture. The alfalfa–tall fescue mixture also represents a possible alternative; its lower nutritive value was compensated by its slightly greater yield. Timothy, tall fescue, meadow fescue, and meadow bromegrass remained productive over the first three production years when cultivated in mixture with alfalfa.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".