Abstract
The objective of the investigation was to determine the percentage and yield of weeds in lucerne stands during the productive period. Different cutting regimes (first and final cut date and cutting frequency) were applied as treatments for estimating the extent of the invasion of weeds. Experiment 1 was conducted in 1980-1995 with the locally-bred alfalfa cv. Jogeva 118 to study the connection between the invasion of broad-leaved weeds in the stand and weather conditions. Experiment 2 was carried out in 1991-2003 to investigate the impact of the first cut date and cutting frequency on the total DM yield of the alfalfa stand (cv. Karlu), partial DM yield of weeds, and the percentage of weeds in the stand. Experiments 3 and 4, Medicago sativa type WL 252 HQ variety (US), were sown in Tartu and Koonu to study weed spreading and alfalfa production at different locations. The results showed that management system had a strong impact on the productivity and competition ability of alfalfa and the invasion of weeds into the stand. Decreasing cutting frequency to 2-3 harvest times per season and performing the final cut in the second half of September or in early October allowed us to successfully depress the weeds in the alfalfa stands under Estonian pedoclimatic conditions. It is especially important to avoid more intensive management when extremely rainy and cool, or opposite droughty, weather conditions (total precipitation from May to September below the equivalent of 200 mm) dominate during vegetation period.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 3
Claim · model-written summary
Management system strongly affected alfalfa productivity, competitive ability and weed invasion.
- Taxon
- alfalfa
Medicago sativae0 - Treatment
- management systeme0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- productivity and competition ability of alfalfa and the invasion of weeds into the stande0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“management system had a strong impact on the productivity and competition ability of alfalfa and the invasion of weeds into the stand”
Claim · model-written summary
Cutting two to three times and making the final cut in late September or early October suppressed weeds.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- Decreasing cutting frequency to 2-3 harvest times per season and performing the final cut in the second half of September or in early Octobere0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- weeds in the alfalfa standse0
- Direction
- depresse0
- Setting
- Estoniane0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Decreasing cutting frequency to 2-3 harvest times per season and performing the final cut in the second half of September or in early October allowed us to successfully depress the weeds in the alfalfa stands under Estonian pedoclimatic conditions.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors advise avoiding intensive management during extremely wet and cool or dry weather.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Outcome
- avoid more intensive managemente0
- Qualifier
- extremely rainy and cool, or opposite droughty, weather conditions (total precipitation from May to September below the equivalent of 200 mm)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“It is especially important to avoid more intensive management when extremely rainy and cool, or opposite droughty, weather conditions (total precipitation from May to September below the equivalent of 200 mm) dominate during vegetation period.”
t0“utilisation of alfalfa stands”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · weed · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.