Effects of Temperature and Photoperiod on the Phenological Development of Barnyardgrass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An understanding of the environmental variables influencing the phenological development of weeds is essential for simulation model development. Temperature and photoperiod are important variables governing the phenological development of weeds. Growth cabinet studies were conducted to characterize the phenological development of barnyardgrass [ Echinochloa crus‐galli (L.) Beauv.] in response to variations in temperature and photoperiod and to determine the duration of the juvenile phase and the effect of temperature and photoperiod on reproductive development. Barnyardgrass was adapted to a temperature range of 6.5 to 52°C. Phenological development of barnyardgrass was described in terms of thermal days (cumulative day degrees above a base temperature for leaf appearance, tiller appearance, and shoot elongation). For modeling purposes, three development phases of barnyardgrass at a constant temperature of 20°C were described: (i) a juvenile phase of 1.5 thermal days; (ii) a photoperiod‐sensitive inductive phase of 4.1 thermal days; and (iii) a photoperiod‐sensitive postinductive phase of 19.5 thermal days. Photoperiod sensitivity of barnyardgrass did not differ with stage of development when expressed as a rate. Interpretation of constant sensitivity to photoperiod will simplify simulation of weed phenology in mechanistic models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".