Researches concerning seeds production to three cotton genotypes (Gossypium hirsutum sp.) under agrofield influence in the climatic conditions from Timisoara.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the main objective was to determine the influence of agrofield and the climatic conditions from Timisoara on seed production to three cotton genotypes (Gossypium hirsutum sp.): Marismas and Coko genotypes from Greece and Canada genotype from the USA, in the year 2010 of investigation. Bifactorial experience was placed in the field after subdivided parcels methods. The experimental factors established were: Factor A - agrofield (a1 - N0P0K0; a2 - N30P30K30; a3 - N60P30K30; a4 - N90P60K60; a5 - N120P60K60; a6 - N30P30K30 plus foliar fertilization); factor B - genotypes (b1 - Marismas - Greece, b2 - Canada - the USA, b3 - Coko - Greece). An important role for quality and quantity production had the three fertilized macroelements: azoth, phosphorus and potassium. Analysis of vegetation conditions for the cotton was made during the period May - October; active vegetation period between 1 st May and the first hoarfrost of autumn (the cotton needed 170-180 days from germinal seeds, to the first hoarfrost falling. The best average production of seeds obtained to Marismas genotype, several 1072 kg/ha, comparative with the others genotypes at which realized the following average production: genotype Canada - 1057 kg/ha and to Coko genotype - 1051 kg/ha. The biggest production of seeds for the three genotypes of cotton Marismas, Canada and Coko obtained on agrofield a4 - N90P60K60 (1128 kg/ha for Marismas genotype, 1130 kg/ha for Canada genotype and 1136 kg/ha for Coko genotype) comparative to control agrofield (a1 - N0P0K0). Fertilization dose until 90 kg/ha positively influenced the production of cotton seeds, the increases of production statistical being assured of significant and distinct significant on agrofields a4 - N90P60K60 and a5 - N120P60K60. The obtained results were statistically processed the analysis of variance and differences at p<0.05 were considered statistically significant. The foliar fertilization determined distinct significant increases of production, also. The three genotypes of cotton presented a good adaptability to weather conditions of Timisoara, in the year 2010.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".