application · Yield · Medicago sativa (alfalfa)
73 claims from these papers; 2 citations between them.
Papers here report positive and negative or no-effect results. No pair of them has been accepted in the claim-by-claim check.
How these papers cite each other
2 citations between these papers: 2 on the same side, 0 across the two sides.
- Positive result
- Negative result or no effect
- Citation, pointing to the cited paper
- Citation across the two sides
- Larger circle: more citations overall
Years run left to right. Citations come from the papers’ OpenAlex reference lists. Hover a paper to bring forward its citations; click it to open the paper.
Papers reporting a positive result 31
A COMPARISON OF LUCERNE VARIETIES IN SOUTH‐WEST SCOTLAND · 1960
- positive
Spraying Alfalfa Hay with Water Before Baling to Minimize Harvesting Losses1 · 1973
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
- positive
Response of alfalfa to iron and boron in some Egyptian soils · 1984
- positive
Alfalfa responses to foliar and soil applications of manganese · 1993
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Effects of exogenous CTK on the growth and character of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) plants · 2005
- positive
Effects of Cuprum(Cu) on Herbage Yield and Mineral Nutrition of Alfalfa · 2009
- positive
Effect of manganese(Mn)and boron(B) on herbage yield and mineral elements content of alfalfa · 2009
- positive
The effect of foliar application of boron on alfalfa seed yield. · 2012
- positive
- positive
Effects of B and Zn on Mineral Element and Carbohydrate of Alfalfa · 2013
- positive
Response of alfalfa forage to phosphorus, boron and manganese based fertilizing systems · 2016
- positive
0654 Impact of foliar spray on yield and chemical composition of alfalfa hay · 2016
- positive
EFFECT OF GROWTH REGULATORS ON SEED YIELD AND ITS COMPONENTS OF TWO ALFALFA CULTIVARS · 2016
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
INFLUENCE OF FOLIAR APPLICATION OF ZINC ON SEED YIELD AND ITS COMPONENTS IN SOME ALFALFA VARIETIES · 2018
- positive
WAYS TO INCREASE THE PRODUCTIVITY OF ALFALFA SOWING ON SEEDS · 2019
- positive
Role of boric acid on economic seed production of alfalfa under climatic conditions of Sargodha · 2020
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
The Effect of Foliar Boron Application on Seed Production of Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) · 2020
- positive
- positive
EFFECT OF HUMIC ACID CONCENTRATION AND SPRAYING STAGES ON SEEDS YIELD AND ITS CONPONENTS OF ALFALFA · 2021
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
Features of cultuvation allfalfa on light chestnut soils of the Volga-Don interfl uves area · 2023
- positive
- positive
- positive
- no effect
- positive
- positive
- positive
FORAGE PRODUCTION AND QUALITY OF LUCERNE (Medicago sativa L.) UNDER MINERAL POTASSIC FERTILIZATION · 2024
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
- positive
EFFECT OF MOLYBDENUM CONCENTRATION AND SPRAYING STAGES ON SEED YIELD AND ITS COMPONENTS OF ALFALFA · 2025
- positive
- positive
- positive
Agroecological efficiency of biological preparations in growing alfalfa for seed · 2025
- positive
- positive
Papers reporting a negative result or no effect 7
- no effect
- no effect
Alfalfa Establishment and Production with Continuous Alfalfa and Following Soybeans1 · 1983
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
Response of Cotton, Alfalfa, and Cantaloupe to Foliar‐deposited Salt in an Arid Environment · 1987
- no effect
- no effect
Potato Leafhopper Management: Effects on Production and Quality of Alfalfa‐Timothy Mixtures · 1995
- no effect
Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Surface versus Injected Manure in Perennial Hay Crops · 2018
- no effect
A paper is on the positive side when any of its claims here is positive. Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. Claims that compare genotypes are left out; a claim about lacking a nutrient counts the other way round in that nutrient’s question. “Results differ” marks a question where two model reviewers, reading both claims, accepted at least one pair of papers whose results differ.