Alfalfa and Timothy Nutritive Value in Contrasting Agroclimatic Regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Core Ideas Lower fiber and greater digestibility but lower mass of forages were observed in cool regions. Contrasted regions did not affect forage non‐structural carbohydrates, total N, and fatty acids. Lower growing degree days are needed for reaching the developmental stage for harvest in cool regions. ABSTRACT Temperature affects forage nutritive value but little information exists on the effects of climatically‐contrasting regions. Forage nutritive value at three sites in eastern Canada was compared for alfalfa ( Medicago sativa L.) and timothy ( Phleum pratense L.) by measuring attributes four to seven times during primary growth over 2 yr and comparing values at specific developmental stage or forage mass using regression analyses. At the recommended stage of development for harvest, alfalfa and timothy at Normandin, QC (30‐yr average of 1359 cumulative growing degree days, GDD), generally had a superior nutritive value in terms of forage fiber concentrations and digestibility but lower forage mass compared with forages at the more southern sites of St‐Augustin‐de‐Desmaures, QC (1712 GDD), and Ste‐Anne‐de‐Bellevue, QC (2098 GDD). For example, the neutral detergent fiber concentration of timothy at early heading was less at Normandin than St‐Augustin and Ste‐Anne (613 vs 650 and 652 g kg −1 dry matter, DM) but forage mass was less (4.02 vs 6.14 and 5.00 Mg DM ha −1 ). The in vitro true digestibility of DM (IVTD) of alfalfa at early flowering was greater at Normandin than St‐Augustin and Ste‐Anne (765 vs 729 and 726 g kg −1 DM) but forage mass was less (3.86 vs 6.38 and 6.15 Mg DM ha −1 ). When compared at similar forage mass, forages at the northernmost site had either similar or lower nutritive value than at the southern sites. The three climatically‐contrasted sites did not differ for forage non‐structural carbohydrate (NSC), total N, and total fatty concentrations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".