MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969218745 · doi:10.4141/cjss08050

Compositional nutrient diagnosis of corn using the Mahalanobis distance as nutrient imbalance index

2009· article· en· W1969218745 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Léon Étienne Parent, William Natale, Noura Ziadi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMahalanobis distanceNutrientMathematicsOutlierGrain yieldFertilizerZea maysCalibrationStatisticsAnimal sciencePhosphorusNitrogenAgronomyBiologyChemistryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compositional nutrient diagnosis (CND) provides a plant nutrient imbalance index (CND - r 2 ) with assumed χ 2 distribution. The Mahalanobis distance D 2 , which detects outliers in compositional data sets, has a χ 2 distribution. The objective of this paper was to compare D 2 and CND – r 2 nutrient imbalance indexes in corn (Zea mays L.). We measured grain yield as well as N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn concentrations in the ear leaf at silk stage for 210 calibration sites in the St. Lawrence Lowlands [2300–2700 corn thermal units (CTU)] as well as 30 phosphorus (2300–2700 CTU; 10 sites) and 10 nitrogen (1900–2100 CTU; one site) replicated fertilizer treatments for validation. We derived CND norms as mean, standard deviation, and the inverse covariance matrix of centred log ratios (clr) for high yielding specimens (≥9.0 Mg grain ha–1 at 150 g H2O kg–1 moisture content) in the 2300–2700 CTU zone. Using χ 2 = 17 (P < 0.05) with nine degrees of freedom (i.e., nine nutrients) as a rejection criterion for outliers and a yield threshold of 8.6 Mg ha–1 after Cate-Nelson partitioning between low- and high-yielders in the P validation data set, D 2 misclassified two specimens compared with nine for CND –r 2 . The D 2 classification was not significantly different from a χ 2 classification (P > 0.05), but the CND – r 2 classification differed significantly from χ 2 or D 2 (P < 0.001). A threshold value for nutrient imbalance could thus be derived probabilistically for conducting D 2 diagnosis, while the CND – r 2 nutrient imbalance threshold must be calibrated using fertilizer trials. In the proposed CND –D 2 procedure, D 2 is first computed to classify the specimen as possible outlier. Thereafter, nutrient indices are ranked in their order of limitation. The D 2 norms appeared less effective in the 1900–2100 CTU zone. Key words: Nutrient balance, simplex closure, variance-covariance matrix, χ 2 distribution, grain corn, nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations41
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207