Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Drying agent treatment increased in situ NDF and ADF disappearance in first-cutting leaves.

A claim from Alfalfa Treated with a Chemical Drying Agent: Effect on Digestibility In Situ · 1990

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drying agent treatment increased in situ NDF and ADF disappearance in first-cutting leaves.

Taxon
AlfalfaMedicago sativat0
Treatment
chemical drying agente0
Outcome
NDF and ADF in situ disappearancee1
Direction
increasede1

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

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

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

Verbatim

t0

“Alfalfa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–7
e0

“a potassium carbonate-sodium carbonate based chemical drying agent (7.9 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–311
e1

“In first-cutting leaves, NDF and ADF in situ disappearance was increased by treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 735–820

Title

Alfalfa Treated with a Chemical Drying Agent: Effect on Digestibility In Situ

C.J. Ziemer; A.J. Heinrichs; C.J. Canale; et al. Journal of Dairy Science 1990. doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(90)78926-6

Other claims from this paper (6)

Record rev-28a2bb0325538c8ee259b7efb60268f72b54f37cf7a2c7be1c0ae27d7686e7d5 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

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

20 papers: 9 positive, 11 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this claim · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect
  4. no effect
  5. negative
  6. no effect
  7. negative
  8. negative

11 papers more in this group

See all 20 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.