A Comparison between Conventional Tilled and Bicropped Winter Wheat Grown in Monoculture over Four Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A four year experiment was conducted at a site in the south-east of Ireland in which medium and high input conventional winter wheat production systems were compared to no input and low input systems in which winter wheat was direct drilled into an understory of white clover. Whole crop and grain yields from all systems were strongly related to external input levels, yields from bicropped treatments were poor. Nitrogen uptake and grain yields from the conventional treatments declined during the course of the study whereas nitrogen uptake and yields from bicropped treatments were more stable. Fertiliser N application significantly depressed biological production efficiency and altered biomass partitioning. The proportion of biomass partitioned to the stem decreased with fertiliser N, differences between treatments persisted until final harvest. Although the clover sward was still present in the fourth year, this component of the bicrop was gradually replaced by weeds as the experiment progressed in spite of several attempts to control weeds. It is suggested that further research is needed to identify a clover management strategy which ensures the persistence of the white clover sward and allows it to enrich soil fertility in such a way as to be of benefit to the accompanying wheat crop.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".