MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979364790 · doi:10.2135/cropsci2010.01.0032

Plant‐Based Diagnostic Tools for Evaluating Wheat Nitrogen Status

2010· article· en· W1979364790 on OpenAlex
Noura Ziadi, Gilles Bélanger, Annie Claessens, Louis Lefebvre, Nicolas Tremblay, Athyna N. Cambouris, Michel C. Nolin, Léon‐Étienne Parent

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

VenueCrop Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalNational Association of Friendship CentresAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsBiologyPoaceaeNitrogenChlorophyllGrowing seasonFertilizerChlorophyll aHorticultureAnimal scienceBotanyAgronomyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nitrogen nutrition index (NNI), based on critical plant N dilution curves, was developed to determine the in‐season N status of many species including wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.). We assessed the relationship between wheat NNI and two simpler diagnostic tools; namely, leaf nitrogen (N L ) concentration and chlorophyll meter (CM) readings. The study was conducted at six site‐years (2004−2006) in Québec, Canada, using four to eight N fertilizer rates (0−200 kg N ha −1 ). Leaf N concentrations and CM readings were determined from the uppermost collared leaf during the growing season along with NNI determinations. Generally, NNI, N L concentrations, and CM readings increased with increasing N rates. Leaf N concentrations and CM readings were significantly related to NNI during the growing season. Normalization of the CM values, relative to high N plots (relative chlorophyll meter [RCM] readings), improved the relationship with NNI by reducing site‐year differences. However, variation among sampling dates was observed in all relationships. By restricting the sampling dates to essentially the elongation stage, the relationship between NNI and N L (NNI = −0.43 + 0.035 N L ; R 2 = 0.52), CM (NNI = −0.64 + 0.039 CM; R 2 = 0.68), or RCM (NNI = −1.31 + 2.45 RCM; R 2 = 0.82) was generally improved. Nitrogen concentration, CM reading, or RCM reading of the uppermost collared leaf, preferably at the elongation stage, can therefore be used to assess the nutritional status of spring wheat.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.246 · 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