Agronomy Journal Grow Your Career With ASA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Published online 1 May 1983
Published in Agron J 75:461-464 (1983)
© 1983 American Society of Agronomy
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Donovan, T. J.
Right arrow Articles by Meek, B. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Donovan, T. J.
Right arrow Articles by Meek, B. D.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Donovan, T. J.
Right arrow Articles by Meek, B. D.

Alfalfa Responses to Irrigation Treatment and Environment1

T. J. Donovan and B. D. Meek2

Water management is critical for maximum production of alfalfa (Medicago saliva 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 x 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.

Key Words: Medicago sativa L. • Plant temperature • Plant height • Forage yield • Protein concentration • Stand density

1 Contribution from the Imperial Valley Conservation Res. Center, USDA, ARS, Western Region, Brawley, CA 92227.

2 Agronomist and soil scientist, U. S. Salinity Laboratory, Riverside, CA, and the U. S. Cotton Research Station, Shafter, CA, respectively.

Received for publication February 4, 1982.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Crop Science Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education		 Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality		 The Plant Genome
Copyright © 1983 by the American Society of Agronomy.