Abstract
Acid soils limit the growth of aluminum-(Al) sensitive crops such as alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). Management of acid subsoils can be difficult due to physical and economic constraints. Field experiments were conducted at two locations to evaluate the effectiveness of surface-applied gypsum and a flue gas desulfurization by-product for reducing the toxic effects of acid subsoils on alfalfa. The materials were applied at rates of 0, 5, 10, and 15 Mg ha-1. In addition, a glasshouse experiment was conducted that used 0, 5, and 10 Mg ha-1 of gypsum only. Field studies were concluded 41 and 45 months after treatment application at the two locations. No effect of material on alfalfa yield or tissue mineral concentration was observed. Also, rate did not affect yield. However, there were differences in plant tissue mineral concentration in several harvests that were related to rate. Soil was sampled periodically to 120 cm and indicated movement of Ca and S into the soil profile to depths of 60 and 120 cm, respectively. Subsoil pHH2O and pHCaCl2 were not affected by treatment. Extractable and exchangeable Al were not reduced by movement of Ca and S into the soil. In the glasshouse study, alfalfa yields and root growth were not affected by gypsum rate. As gypsum rate increased, plant tissue S increased, but K and Mg decreased. Alfalfa roots did not grow below 60 cm, even though there was indication of material movement to 90 cm in the soil. Although sulfur moved to 75 cm, no effect on soil Al was observed. Leachate collected from the bottoms of columns indicated that soil cations were leached as a result of gypsum application. Gypsum and the flue gas desulfurization by-product did not significantly affect the acid soils used in these studies or improve alfalfa growth.
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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Field amendments did not affect alfalfa yield.
- Taxon
- alfalfa
Medicago sativae0 - Treatment
- materiale0
- Outcome
- alfalfa yielde0
- Direction
- No effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No effect of material on alfalfa yield or tissue mineral concentration was observed”
Claim · model-written summary
Field amendments did not affect alfalfa tissue mineral concentration.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- materiale0
- Outcome
- tissue mineral concentratione0
- Direction
- No effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No effect of material on alfalfa yield or tissue mineral concentration was observed”
Claim · model-written summary
Application rate did not affect alfalfa yield.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- ratee0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Also, rate did not affect yield”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant tissue mineral concentration differed with application rate in several harvests.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- ratee0
- Outcome
- plant tissue mineral concentratione0
- Qualifier
- several harvestse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there were differences in plant tissue mineral concentration in several harvests that were related to rate”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Calcium moved into the soil profile to 60 cm.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“movement of Ca and S into the soil profile to depths of 60 and 120 cm, respectively”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulfur moved into the soil profile to 120 cm.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“movement of Ca and S into the soil profile to depths of 60 and 120 cm, respectively”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
The amendments did not affect subsoil pH.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- treatmente0
- Outcome
- Subsoil pHH2O and pHCaCl2e0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Subsoil pHH2O and pHCaCl2 were not affected by treatment”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Movement of calcium and sulfur did not reduce extractable and exchangeable aluminum.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- movement of Ca and Se0
- Outcome
- Extractable and exchangeable Ale0
- Direction
- not reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Extractable and exchangeable Al were not reduced by movement of Ca and S into the soil”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Glasshouse alfalfa yields were unaffected by gypsum rate.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- gypsum ratee0
- Outcome
- alfalfa yieldse0
- Direction
- not affectede0
- Setting
- glasshousee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the glasshouse study, alfalfa yields and root growth were not affected by gypsum rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Glasshouse alfalfa root growth was unaffected by gypsum rate.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- gypsum ratee0
- Outcome
- root growthe0
- Direction
- not affectede0
- Setting
- glasshousee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the glasshouse study, alfalfa yields and root growth were not affected by gypsum rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant tissue sulfur increased as gypsum rate increased.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- gypsum ratee0
- Outcome
- plant tissue Se0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“As gypsum rate increased, plant tissue S increased, but K and Mg decreased”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant tissue potassium decreased as gypsum rate increased.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- gypsum ratee0
- Outcome
- Ke0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“As gypsum rate increased, plant tissue S increased, but K and Mg decreased”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant tissue magnesium decreased as gypsum rate increased.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- gypsum ratee0
- Outcome
- Mge0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“As gypsum rate increased, plant tissue S increased, but K and Mg decreased”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Alfalfa roots did not grow below 60 cm despite amendment movement to 90 cm.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Outcome
- Alfalfa roots did not grow below 60 cme0
- Value
- 60 cme0
- Qualifier
- material movement to 90 cme0
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alfalfa roots did not grow below 60 cm, even though there was indication of material movement to 90 cm in the soil”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulfur moved to 75 cm without changing soil aluminum.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Although sulfur moved to 75 cm, no effect on soil Al was observed”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Gypsum application leached soil cations from columns.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativat0
- Treatment
- gypsum applicatione0
- Outcome
- soil cationse0
- Direction
- leachede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leachate collected from the bottoms of columns indicated that soil cations were leached as a result of gypsum application”
t0“alfalfa”
Claim · model-written summary
Gypsum and desulfurization by-product did not significantly improve alfalfa growth.
- Taxon
- alfalfaMedicago sativae0
- Treatment
- Gypsum and the flue gas desulfurization by-producte0
- Outcome
- alfalfa growthe0
- Direction
- did not significantly affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Gypsum and the flue gas desulfurization by-product did not significantly affect the acid soils used in these studies or improve alfalfa growth”
The same questions in other papers
sulfur atom · nutrient: content · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →calcium atom · nutrient: content · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →lime · yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Results differ
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 41 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
46 papers more in this group
See all 50 papers →lime · molecular: metabolites · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →lime · growth · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →lime · nutrient: content · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
25 papers more in this group
See all 29 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.