Effect of pre-plant tillage systems for potatoes in Prince Edward Island, Canada, on soil properties, weed control and potato yield
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prince Edward Island, Canada produces more than 45,000 ha (111,197 ac) of potatoes (Solarium tuberosum L) mostly in a three-year rotation on sloping land on a fine, sandy loam soil that is prone to soil erosion in the spring and during the growing season. This intensive production system has resulted in problems with soil quality and erosion because much of the land is plowed in the fall. Soil erosion can be reduced by use of conservation tillage, but these practices may negatively impact crop performance. Work was initiated in 1999 at the Harrington Research Farm to determine the effects of four tillage regimes: residue management, zero tillage, zone tillage, and conventional tillage on soil properties, weed control, and yield and quality of Russet Burbank potatoes. The conservation tillage practices of zone tillage, zero tillage, and residue management resulted in reduced soil erosion rates and sediment loss compared to the conventional tillage method. Soil penetration resistance was increased by as much as 1000 kPa with some systems. However, soil penetration resistance did not approach levels that are considered detrimental to root growth (1500 kPa). Early spring soil moisture levels were higher by two to 12 percent with conservation tillage treatments but planting was not delayed compared to commercial producers who used conventional tillage. No effect was found on weed control or potato plant emergence. There was no consistent difference in potato yields with conservation tillage systems used in these studies. Our data suggests that the potential benefits of reduced soil erosion risk and lower producer input costs of conservation tillage systems outweigh the negative effect of higher soil compaction and higher spring soil moisture.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".