Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-10T09:43:41.943Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of seasonal temperature on the yield and chemical composition of a lucerne-timothy mixture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Herman A. Hamilton ,
P. P. Dermine  and
M. Hidiroglou
Herman A. Hamilton
Affiliation:
Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture, Kapuskasing, Ontario
P. P. Dermine
Affiliation:
Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture, Kapuskasing, Ontario
M. Hidiroglou
Affiliation:
Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture, Kapuskasing, Ontario
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The yield and mineral composition of a timothylucerne mixture at different stages of maturity were determined in selected growing periods under the climatic conditions of Northern Ontario.

2. An alteration in temperature from cool to warm or from warm to cool conditions appeared to favour increased forage production, but the rate of increase in dry-matter yields declined more under cooler conditions.

3. Forage yields obtained on a second cutting increased with delayed harvesting of the first cut, and yield reductions from an early harvest were not economically compensated for by increased yields of dry matter of the second cutting.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 66 , Issue 2 , April 1966 , pp. 263 - 269
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Archibald, J. G. (1961). J. Dairy Sci. 44, 511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beeson, K. C. (1941). U.S.D.A. Misc. Publ. no. 369.Google Scholar
Blasek, K. E. & Brady, N. C. (1950). Agron. J. 42, 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer, E. (1952). Brit. Vet. J. 108, 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dermine, P. (1965). Can. Dep. Agric. Publ. no. 1234.Google Scholar
Dubois, M., Gilles, J. A., Hamilton, J. K., Bebers, P. A. & Smith, F. (1956). Anal. Chem. 28, 350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, D. B. (1955). Biometrics, 11, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemp, A. & T'HART, M. L. (1957). Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 5, 4.Google Scholar
Kitson, R. E. & Mellon, M. G. (1944). Ind. Eng. Ghem. (Anal, , ed.), 16, 379.Google Scholar
Mellin, T. N., Poulton, B. R. & Anderson, M. J. (1962). J. Anim. Sci. 21, 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moline, W. J. & Wedin, W. F. (1963). Agron. J. 55, 319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, K. F., Halstead, R. L., Maclean, A. J., Holmes, R. M. & Bourgbt, S. J. (1960). Proc. 8th Int. Orassl. Oongr. 12A/5, 287.Google Scholar
Pbitchard, G. I., Plgden, W. J. & Folkins, L. P. (1964). Canad. J. PI. Sci. 44, 318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, B. B. & Kurtz, L. T. (1961). Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 25, 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, A., Toth, S. J. & Bear, F. E. (1948). Soil Sci. 65, 249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Worley, R. E., Blaser, R. E. & Thomas, G. W. (1963). Crop. Sci. 3, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar