Effect of irrigation treatments on alfalfa (<i>Medicago sativa</i>L.) production, persistence, and soil salinity in southern California

Lehman, W. F.; Richards, S. J.; Erwin, D. C.; Marsh, A

doi:10.3733/hilg.v39n09p277

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In several studies (2, 12,16,18) alfalfa growth was related to amount and frequency of irrigation and proximity of water table. Measurement of changes in soil water has been used as criterion for refining estimates of water use (4,11,14,16).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Alfalfa Responses to Irrigation Treatment and Environment¹

Donovan¹,

Meek

1983

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water management is critical for maximum production of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) with under irrigation resulting in loss of production and over irrigation resulting in a loss of stand. The purpose of this study was to determine the optimum irrigation rates under high evaporative demand. Growth of alfalfa was evaluated on replicated plots (6 × 6 m) established on a fine textured soil (Typic Torrifluvent, clayey over loamy, montmorillonitic, calcareous hyperthermic family) and differentially irrigated from July 1975 to January 1978. The irrigation treatments were applied at 56, 66, 75 (best estimate of Ep and 84% of pan evaporation (Ep) and described as dry, semidry, optimum and wet, respectively. Alfalfa yields increased with increase in water applied. Irrigation at 84% Ep for leaching did not enhance yield over the optimum water treatment possibly because of reduced stand from waterlogging. The protein concentration of alfalfa was higher in dry than in wet treatments in March and November. During the summer, plant temperatures in the dry treatment were up to 7 C higher than in the wet treatment.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Alfalfa Responses to Irrigation Treatment and Environment¹

Donovan¹,

Meek

1983

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 Although little is known of how alfalfa is damaged by flooding, the deleterious effects on yield are welldocumented. Numerous studies indicate that excessive irrigation decreased yield andjor stand life (10,12,15,17,18). Bolton and McKenzie (2) estimated that alfalfa grown under field conditions could endure 10 to 14 days of early spring flooding without "excessive permanent injury".…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Growth Response of Alfalfa to Duration of Soil Flooding and to Temperature

Thompson¹,

Fick

1981

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) is very sensitive to excessive soil water, yet few studies have been done under controlled conditions to quantify the extent of this sensitivity. The objective of these studies was to investigate the effect of wet soil conditions on alfalfa production. The growth of roots and tops was determined in a factorial greenhouse and growth chamber experiment with treatments for duration of flooding and temperature. Five‐week‐old alfalfa plants, potted in pasteurized soil, were flooded to the soil surface for 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 days at temperatures of 16, 21, and 27 C, and for 3, 6, 9, and 12 days at 32 C. Root and top dry weights (DW) of flooded and control plants were measured upon draining. Three weeks after draining, the plants were cut to a 2.5 cm stubble and top DW was measured. After 2 subsequent weeks of regrowth, top and root DW's were again measured. Results demonstrated that root growth stopped during flooding. As measured over the 3 weeks following drainage, the rate of top growth of plants was reduced by 50% with 8 days of flooding at 16 C, 4 days at 21 C, 3 days at 27 C, and 2 days at 32 C. No net top growth occurred during the 3 weeks following drainage in plants flooded for over 14 days at 16 C, 10 days at 21 C, 8 days at 27 C, and 6 days at 32 C. In most cases, the negative response to flooding occurred before the disease Phytophthora megasperma Drechs. is thought to have been able to have an influence. This argues for a physiological as opposed to a pathological basis for the injury.

show abstract