Abstract
Abstract Food and fodder shortage in arid and semi‐arid regions force farmers to use marginal quality water for meeting the water requirement of crops which result in low quality, reduced production and an adverse impact on soil properties. A field study on loamy‐sand (Hyperthermic Typic Ustipsamments) saline soil was conducted during 1999–2001 at Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hisar. This involved assessment of effects of conjunctive use of saline water, EC = 4·6–7·4 dSm −1 , SAR = 14–22 ((mmol −1 ) ½ with good quality water on five fodder crop rotations: oat‐sorghum ( Avena sativa‐ – Sorghum bicolor ), rye grass–sorghum ( Loleum rigidum — Sorghum bicolor ), Egyptian clover—sorghum ( Trifoleum alexandrinum — Sorghum bicolor ), Persian clover—sorghum ( Trifoleum resupinatum — Sorghum bicolor ) and Indian clover–sorghum ( Melilotus indica — Sorghum bicolor ) and certain soil properties associated with it. Leguminous winter fodder crops were more sensitive to poor quality water use. Reductions in fodder yield with use of saline water alone throughout season were 85, 68, 54, 42, 36 and 26 per cent in Indian clover, Egyptian clover, Persian clover, oat, rye grass and sorghum respectively as compared to good quality water. Leguminous fodder crops produced protein rich (12–14 per cent) and low fibre (18–20 per cent) fodder as compared to poor quality grassy fodder under good quality water irrigation but their quality deteriorated when saline water was used. These leguminous crops accumulated proportionately higher Na + (1·58 per cent) resulting in adverse impact on their growth as compared to grassy fodder crops. Higher soil salinity (12·2 dSm −1 ), SAR = 20 (mmol −1 ) ½ was recorded with saline water irrigation; and slight adverse impact was noticed on infiltration rate and contents of water dispersible clay. Alternate cyclic use of canal and saline water could be an option for fodder production under such conditions. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 15
Claim · model-written summary
Leguminous winter fodder crops were more sensitive to poor quality water use.
Verbatim
e1“Leguminous winter fodder crops were more sensitive to poor quality water use”
Claim · model-written summary
Saline water alone reduced fodder yield in Indian clover by 85 per cent compared with good quality water.
Verbatim
e1“Reductions in fodder yield with use of saline water alone throughout season were 85, 68, 54, 42, 36 and 26 per cent in Indian clover, Egyptian clover, Persian clover, oat, rye grass and sorghum respectively as compared to good quality water”
e2“at Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hisar”
Claim · model-written summary
Saline water alone reduced fodder yield in Egyptian clover by 68 per cent compared with good quality water.
Verbatim
e1“Reductions in fodder yield with use of saline water alone throughout season were 85, 68, 54, 42, 36 and 26 per cent in Indian clover, Egyptian clover, Persian clover, oat, rye grass and sorghum respectively as compared to good quality water”
e2“at Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hisar”
Claim · model-written summary
Saline water alone reduced fodder yield in Persian clover by 54 per cent compared with good quality water.
Verbatim
e1“Reductions in fodder yield with use of saline water alone throughout season were 85, 68, 54, 42, 36 and 26 per cent in Indian clover, Egyptian clover, Persian clover, oat, rye grass and sorghum respectively as compared to good quality water”
e2“at Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hisar”
Claim · model-written summary
Saline water alone reduced fodder yield in oat by 42 per cent compared with good quality water.
- Taxon
- oat
Avena sativae1 - Treatment
- saline water alone throughout seasone1
- Outcome
- fodder yielde1
- Direction
- Reductionse1
- Value
- 42e1
- Qualifier
- per cente1
- Comparator
- good quality watere1
- Setting
- Hisare2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Reductions in fodder yield with use of saline water alone throughout season were 85, 68, 54, 42, 36 and 26 per cent in Indian clover, Egyptian clover, Persian clover, oat, rye grass and sorghum respectively as compared to good quality water”
e2“at Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hisar”
Claim · model-written summary
Saline water alone reduced fodder yield in rye grass by 36 per cent compared with good quality water.
- Treatment
- saline water alone throughout seasone1
- Outcome
- fodder yielde1
- Direction
- Reductionse1
- Value
- 36e1
- Qualifier
- per cente1
- Comparator
- good quality watere1
- Setting
- Hisare2
LoliumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Reductions in fodder yield with use of saline water alone throughout season were 85, 68, 54, 42, 36 and 26 per cent in Indian clover, Egyptian clover, Persian clover, oat, rye grass and sorghum respectively as compared to good quality water”
e2“at Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hisar”
Claim · model-written summary
Saline water alone reduced fodder yield in sorghum by 26 per cent compared with good quality water.
- Treatment
- saline water alone throughout seasone1
- Outcome
- fodder yielde1
- Direction
- Reductionse1
- Value
- 26e1
- Qualifier
- per cente1
- Comparator
- good quality watere1
- Setting
- Hisare2
SorghumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Reductions in fodder yield with use of saline water alone throughout season were 85, 68, 54, 42, 36 and 26 per cent in Indian clover, Egyptian clover, Persian clover, oat, rye grass and sorghum respectively as compared to good quality water”
e2“at Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hisar”
Claim · model-written summary
Leguminous fodder crops grown under good quality water irrigation had higher protein content (12–14 per cent) than poor quality grassy fodder.
- Taxon
- Leguminous fodder cropse1
- Treatment
- good quality water irrigatione1
- Outcome
- protein riche1
- Value
- 12–14 per cente1
- Comparator
- poor quality grassy foddere1
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e1“Leguminous fodder crops produced protein rich (12–14 per cent) and low fibre (18–20 per cent) fodder as compared to poor quality grassy fodder under good quality water irrigation but their quality deteriorated when saline water was used”
Claim · model-written summary
Leguminous fodder crops grown under good quality water irrigation had low fibre (18–20 per cent) compared with poor quality grassy fodder.
- Taxon
- Leguminous fodder cropse1
- Treatment
- good quality water irrigatione1
- Outcome
- low fibree1
- Value
- 18–20 per cente1
- Comparator
- poor quality grassy foddere1
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e1“Leguminous fodder crops produced protein rich (12–14 per cent) and low fibre (18–20 per cent) fodder as compared to poor quality grassy fodder under good quality water irrigation but their quality deteriorated when saline water was used”
Claim · model-written summary
Leguminous fodder crops quality deteriorated when saline water was used.
Verbatim
e1“Leguminous fodder crops produced protein rich (12–14 per cent) and low fibre (18–20 per cent) fodder as compared to poor quality grassy fodder under good quality water irrigation but their quality deteriorated when saline water was used”
Claim · model-written summary
Leguminous crops accumulated proportionately higher Na + (1·58 per cent) than grassy fodder crops under saline water use.
Verbatim
e2“These leguminous crops accumulated proportionately higher Na + (1·58 per cent) resulting in adverse impact on their growth as compared to grassy fodder crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Leguminous crops showed adverse impact on growth compared with grassy fodder crops because of Na accumulation.
Verbatim
e2“These leguminous crops accumulated proportionately higher Na + (1·58 per cent) resulting in adverse impact on their growth as compared to grassy fodder crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher soil salinity (12·2 dSm −1) was recorded with saline water irrigation.
Verbatim
e1“Higher soil salinity (12·2 dSm −1 ), SAR = 20 (mmol −1 ) ½ was recorded with saline water irrigation; and slight adverse impact was noticed on infiltration rate and contents of water dispersible clay”
e3“on five fodder crop rotations”
Claim · model-written summary
Saline water irrigation had a slight adverse impact on infiltration rate and water dispersible clay.
Verbatim
e1“Higher soil salinity (12·2 dSm −1 ), SAR = 20 (mmol −1 ) ½ was recorded with saline water irrigation; and slight adverse impact was noticed on infiltration rate and contents of water dispersible clay”
e3“on five fodder crop rotations”
Claim · model-written summary
Alternate cyclic use of canal and saline water could be an option for fodder production under such conditions.
Verbatim
e4“Alternate cyclic use of canal and saline water could be an option for fodder production under such conditions”
e3“on five fodder crop rotations”
The same questions in other papers
salinity · yield · Avena sativa (oats)Results differ
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- negative
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →salinity · yield · SorghumResults differ
25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
27 papers more in this group
See all 31 papers →climate site · yield · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →climate site · yield · SorghumPositive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 papers →salinity · yield · LoliumResults agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
- negative
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.