MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1749296395 · doi:10.30835/2413-7510.2014.42148

Реакція сортів рису на строк сівби в умовах степу України

2014· article· en· W1749296395 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
В. О. Скидан, М. С. Скидан, В. М. Сучкова

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Breeding and Seed Production · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Biological Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSowingAgronomyFertilizerGerminationCropYield (engineering)SeedingSteppeMathematicsBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the advent of new varieties became necessary research complex influence of fertilizer and time of sowing on the yield of rice in the rice crop rotations. Therefore, our research has focused on that issue. The purpose and objectives of research. The aim of our study was to determine the features of the cultivation of rice varieties, depending on the doses of fertilizers and time of sowing. Methodology and source material, years of research. Investigations were carried out at the experimental field of the Institute of NAAS rice in 2011-2012. The experiments were laid by the method Dospehovim BA Results and discussion. Presented are the results of research in the seeding times and fertilizers the rice yields in rice crop rotation under the conditions of the southern steppe of Ukraine. It is discovered that the best rice yield was recorded with N120+30P30 fertilizer in the first sowing times, which constituted 6.48 tonnes/ha for the Debut strain, 8.04 tonnes/ha for the Ontario strain and 8.24 tonnes/ha for the Admiral strain. The Debut strain proved to be the most sensitive to the sowing times in terms of germinating capacity which has fallen down by 5.1-13.1% compared to the first sowing time. The germinating capacity of the Ontario strain showed steady response to the sowing times.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.737
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.150 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Breeding and Seed ProductionSame topicAgriculture and Biological StudiesFrench-language works237,207