MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978231564 · doi:10.1614/wt-08-067.1

Response of Corn to Simulated Glyphosate Drift Followed by In-Crop Herbicides

2009· article· en· W1978231564 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueWeed Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWeed Control and Herbicide Applications
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Guelph
FundersUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsGlyphosateShootAtrazineAgronomyDicambaCropDry weightBromoxynilWeedField experimentAnimal scienceHorticulturePesticideWeed controlBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thirteen field experiments were conducted in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Ontario from 2005 to 2007 to determine the effects of simulated glyphosate drift followed by in-crop applications of nicosulfuron/rimsulfuron plus dicamba/diflufenzopyr or foramsulfuron plus bromoxynil plus atrazine on nontransgenic corn injury, height, stand count, shoot dry weight, and yield. Simulated glyphosate drift at 100 and 200 g/ha, resulted in 11 to 61% visual crop injury and a 19 to 45% decrease in corn height. Simulated glyphosate drift at 200 g/ha caused a reduction in shoot dry weight by 46%, stand count by 28% and yield by 49 to 56%. Generally, simulated glyphosate drift followed by the in-crop herbicides resulted in an additive response with respect to visual crop injury, height, stand count, shoot dry weight, and yield.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.219 · 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