Economic Evaluation of Production Methods for Sweet Corn in a Cool Climate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of plastic mulch offers an economically profitable approach for producing sweet corn (Zea mays L.) in Newfoundland (Canada) because of its warming effect on the soil and air around emerging plants in late spring. Information on the combined use of plastic mulch and planting dates is needed to develop a base for future research and on-farm maximum economic yield demonstration programs. Studies were conducted from May to mid-October in 2001, 2002, and 2003 to determine the effects of mulching and planting dates on days from planting to maturity (DH), total marketable yield (TMY) and the economic value (gross returns, GR; net returns, NR; and production efficiency, PE-a measure of output/input ratio) of sweet corn. The experiment was structured as a split plot design in a randomized complete block arrangement and three replicates. The main treatment was mulching: plastic mulch (PM) and no mulch (NM), and the subplot treatments were the planting dates: 1, 15 and 29 May, abbreviated PD1, PD2, and PD3, respectively. For each mulch-planting date treatment, matured ears were hand harvested and sold over a 3 wk period. There was no year effect on the measured variables. Planting date had significant effect on DH, TMY and GR. When averaged across planting dates, the PM decreased DH by 10 d. Mulching had significant effect on all variables, except TMY. However, the high premium price obtained from early planting with PM more than offset the extra cost of using plastic mulch. The beneficial effects of PM on GR were consistent across planting dates. With PM, GR had a more favorable response at PD1 than at PD2 or PD3 but with NM, GR was higher at PD2 and similar at PD1 and PD3. The PM increased NR by > $3,000.00 (Canadian) . ha - 1 over NM and had a PE of 5.37 compared to 4.94 for NM. The study confirmed the use of plastic mulch as a tool to reduce risk in sweet corn production and with a high potential to increase profitability in Newfoundland.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".