MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981545476 · doi:10.4141/p03-202

Influence of seeding date and harvest stage on yields and essential oil composition of three cultivars of dill (<i>Anethum graveolens</i> L.) grown in Nova Scotia

2004· article· en· W1981545476 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kelly M. Bowes, Valtcho D. Zheljazkov, C. D. Caldwell, James A. Pincock, Jeffrey C. Roberts

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEssential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnethum graveolensCarvoneEssential oilCultivarSeedingHorticultureComposition (language)BiologyAgronomyBotanyChemistryLimonene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experiments were conducted in two locations in Nova Scotia, Canning and Truro, during 2001 and 2002 to determine the effect of seeding date and harvest stage on productivity and composition of essential oil from Anethum graveolens L. ‘Mesten, Dukat’ and ‘Hercules’. Delayed seeding generally reduced yields and altered the concentration of some essential oil components. Both dill seed and dill weed oil from this study had compositions similar to commercially available oil and reported dill oil compositions. The seed oil had moderate to high carvone content (17.9–64.0%) as is desired for the international market. Carvone content in oil increased as the plants matured. Lower yields and essential oil yields were obtained from cv. Hercules compared with the other two cultivars. Herbage yields and essential oil content were typical for the plant species; seed yields were below average, but there is potential to increase these yields through different seeding dates, harvest dates and investigation into optimum nutrient requirements. Key words: Dill, Anethum graveolens, Apiaceae, essential oil, hydrodistillation, steam distillation

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)0.000
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 score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations18
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicEssential Oils and Antimicrobial ActivityFrench-language works237,207