Dry Bean Production in Zero and Conventional Tillage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adoption of zero tillage production practices for dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) has lagged behind that of many other crops. A field experiment was conducted at two locations on the Canadian prairies to determine the response of dry bean planted into various crop stubbles in conventional and zero tillage. Dry bean emergence was delayed in one of six site years with zero tillage (ZT) compared with conventional tillage (CT) but maturity date was not affected. Dry bean density was never lower with ZT compared with CT and was higher in a few instances. There were no differences in insect or disease infestations between the two tillage treatments. Weed densities were slightly greater with ZT compared with CT but were well controlled with in‐crop applications of sethoxydim and bentazon. Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) was the only previous crop to negatively affect dry bean yield as volunteer flax was not adequately controlled with bentazon. Over all previous crop stubbles and years, dry bean yield was similar in both tillage systems. Dry bean yielded 2060 and 2110 kg ha−1, and 1600 and 1710 kg ha−1 with CT and ZT at Lethbridge and Lacombe, Alberta, respectively. These results indicate that there is potential for successful production of dry bean within ZT cropping systems.
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".