MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sweet Corn Plastic Mulch Comparison

2009· report· en· W102722153 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Henry G. Taber, Matthew S. Heard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Disease Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulchPlastic mulchAgronomyEnvironmental scienceAgricultural engineeringHorticultureBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early sweet corn production is enhanced by use of clear plastic mulch. Some growers use this practice on their earliest plantings to gain a market advantage and higher price. In cool, wet springs the practice is highly profitable. In central and northern Iowa, the years with a yield advantage more than offset the costs for years with no gain. There are many color plastic choices with various advertised benefits such as increased soil temperature and reflective radiation that speeds plant growth and development. The sweet corn research is designed to evaluate a few color mulches that are reported to affect corn growth and development—specifically, the sugar content of the kernel at harvest. The blue is supposed to enhance photosynthesis and improve translocation of carbohydrates (sucrose) to the developing kernel. As sweet corn is harvested in the immature stage (as opposed to field corn) it is thought there might be a sugar boost (some Canadian work was indecisive). The mulches were manufactured using pigment resins of a proprietary nature that change the wavelength of reflective radiation – blue and red. Thus, we measured the reflective radiation to see if that is true. Some plastics are included that affect soil temperature more than reflective radiation (i.e, the olive and clear). Increasing soil temperature and resultant enhanced shoot growth and leaf surface area may have more to do with photosynthesis and sugar production than specific reflective radiation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Disease Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207