MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001385123 · doi:10.2134/agronj2009.0266

Determination of a Critical Nitrogen Dilution Curve for Spring Wheat

2010· article· en· W2001385123 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Noura Ziadi, Gilles Bélanger, Annie Claessens, Louis Lefebvre, Athyna N. Cambouris, Nicolas Tremblay, Michel C. Nolin, Léon‐Étienne Parent

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsDilutionAgronomyShootGrain yieldPoaceaeWinter wheatSpring (device)Yield (engineering)Dry matterAnimal scienceChemistryMathematicsHorticultureBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant‐based diagnostic tools of N deficiency can be based on the concept of critical N dilution curves describing whole‐plant critical N concentration (Nc; g kg−1 of dry matter [DM]) as a function of shoot biomass (W; Mg DM ha−1). This has been tested for several crops, including winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) but has not been tested for spring wheat. Our objectives were to determine a critical N dilution curve specific to spring wheat, to compare this curve with existing critical N dilution curves for winter wheat, and to assess the plausibility of using it to estimate the level of N nutrition. The study was conducted at six site‐years (2004–2006) in Québec, Canada, with four to eight N fertilization rates (0–200 kg N ha−1). Shoot biomass and N concentration were determined on five to eight sampling dates during the growing season, and grain yield was measured at harvest. A critical N dilution curve (Nc = 38.5 W−0.57) was determined for spring wheat and was different from those reported for winter wheat. The N nutrition index (NNI = Nobserved/Nc) calculated from this spring wheat critical N dilution curve was significantly related (R2 = 0.70; P < 0.001) to relative grain yield. This critical N dilution curve and the resulting NNI adequately identified situations of limiting and nonlimiting N nutrition and could be used to establish the N nutrition status.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations144
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy JournalSame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207