You are being redirected because this document is part of your ASTM Compass® subscription.
    This document is part of your ASTM Compass® subscription.

    If you are an ASTM Compass Subscriber and this document is part of your subscription, you can access it for free at ASTM Compass

    The Influence of Four Exclusion Cylinder Designs on Alfalfa Growth

    Published: 01 June 1979

      Format Pages Price  
    PDF (108K) 5 $25   ADD TO CART
    Complete Source PDF (5.3M) 319 $99   ADD TO CART

    Cite this document

    X Add email address send
      .RIS For RefWorks, EndNote, ProCite, Reference Manager, Zoteo, and many others.   .DOCX For Microsoft Word


    Four exclusion cylinder designs were tested to determine the impact of a cylinder enclosure on the production of the enclosed alfalfa. The designs of the 1.07-m (42-in.) diameter cylinders can be described as follows: (a) 0.9-m (3 ft) high, 25.4-mm (1-in.) mesh welded wire with open top; (b) 0.9-m (3-ft) high, 25.4-mm (1-in.) mesh welded wile with 25.4-mm (1-in.) mesh top; (c) 0.9-m (3-ft) high, 6.35- mm (0.25-in.) mesh hardware cloth with open top; and (d) 0.46-m (18-in.) high, 25.4-mm (1-in.) mesh welded wire with 25.4-mm (1-in.) mesh top. The cylinders were placed in ground-squirrel-free alfalfa fields for various time intervals from mid-March to mid-June 1976 and 1977. The sample unit included vegetation within a cylinder and comparable area(s) of vegetation within 1.5 to 3m (5 to 10 ft) from each cylinder, each clipped at ground level. Dry weights were taken of each sample to estimate the hay production. None of the cylinder designs except the 6.35-mm (0.25-in.) mesh caused significant growth change in the enclosed alfalfa. This design resulted in a 15 percent reduction in forage production. No significant small herbivore population was determined by visual observation or feeding activity at feeding census stations.


    vertebrate pest control, exclusion cylinders, damage assessment, rodent damage

    Author Information:

    Sauer, WC
    Services biologist, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Redding, Calif

    Committee/Subcommittee: E35.17

    DOI: 10.1520/STP34966S