I'm going to call BS on this one. I've done many side by sides and the alfalfa fed ones are always bigger and more vigorous. Now I'm not sure if you are talking about feeding directly with it as a top feed or through a tea but it definitely increases growth among other things but that's the biggest thing.
And since you don't like people just throwing there own words out here I'll point you to a study that was done and has shown the same results I have found.
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JARS/v33n2/v33n2-hinerman.htm
I've been interested in Triacontanol on cannabis for a few years now, have conducted a few limited side by side tests and it's a substance I am actively investigating, I still have a few grams (enough to treat hundreds of plants) of lab grade 99.9% Triacontanol left sealed in my fridge still to work with.
I've read that paper you linked and all it references many times, if you take the time to dig deeper into old Triacontanol reports you'll find the ARS pop up a few times.
I also have a patent from the Procter & Gamble pharmaceutical company published in the 1980's (before the interest in Tria died off) outlining the methods by which a stable aqueous solution can be made, containing a sufficiently small particle size of Triacontanol in order for the chemical to be properly utilised by the plant from an atomized spray (unlike the crude fire hose/per acre tea method alluded to in the above link).
The fundamental flaw in these very few, very limited in scope and very subjective experiments concerning Tricontanol since the 70's is they all fail to recognise that Triacontanol is not water soluble, so can in no way be utilised by the plant without prior processing concluding that Tricontanol is not the factor responsible in the subjective tests.
This fact throws all papers concerning Tricontanol in a form without sufficient processing into the 'anecdotal' pot.
The limited suppliers of pure lab grade Triacontanol for the purposes of making a drench/spray solution cite the same standard recipe for preparation that has been running round the internet for years, the one utilising Propylene Glycol/Polysorbate 20 in order for the Triacontanol to dissolve in water.
I have used this preparation to no effect whatsoever on cannabis.
The Proctor & Game patent calls for the use of an ultrasonic homogenizer in order to get the Triacontanol particle size small enough in solution that it can be practically administered to the plant.
At the time I found the patent homogenizors/sonicators were costing around £400 for a simple hand held version.
These days they can be sourced for about £150-£200, more within my price range and I can also use it to make THC infused Haribo jelly sweets (something else that's been on the cards for a while).
So soon I can put the patent to the test.
I got interested in Tricontanol and cannabis after hearing tall story's of "buds the size of your head" emerging from non public forums.
I have yet to find a completed Triacontanol grow journel with any quantifiable results in any major public cannabis forum and I've yet to find a single photo of any cannabis plant from anywhere with a substantial yield even remotely attributable to Triacontanol.
I am very, very sceptical that these 'tall story' plants have ever existed until........
1) I see one with my own eyes.
2) The grower can explain the method by which the functional solution has been produced and it side steps known chemical limitations.
3) The same results can be recreated by others.
Until then I'm the one calling BS.