MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006193530 · doi:10.4141/cjps07078

Adaptation of alternative pulse and oilseed crops to the semiarid Canadian Prairie: Seed yield and water use efficiency

2008· article· en· W2006193530 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaWestern Grains Research Foundation
KeywordsAgronomyCanolaSativumBiologyWater-use efficiencyCropWater useDrought toleranceCroppingField peaMonocultureCropping systemBrassica rapaBrassicaEnvironmental scienceIrrigationAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diversification and intensification of the cropping systems in the traditional wheat-fallow area of the semiarid Canadian prairie is necessary to improve sustainability. Selection of alternate crops to include in cropping systems requires information on production risks with different climate regimes. To understand water use/yield relationships of alternate crops, three pulse crops (leguminous grain crops) [chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), pea (Pisum sativum L.) and lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.)], three oilseed crops [canola (Brassica napus L. and B. rapa L.) and mustard (B. juncea L.)], and one cereal crop [wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)] were studied under varying water regimes: during 1996–1998 under well-watered, rainfed, imposed drought conditions, and in 2001 under rainfed conditions. Generally, the relative ranking between crops for water use was maintained across water regimes, such that the crops separated into three general groups of water users (high: wheat, B. napus, mustard; medium: chickpea, B. rapa, lentil; low: pea) with pea using an average of 34 mm and 13 mm less water than high- and medium-water-using crop groups, respectively. The exceptions included desi chickpea, which tended to use less water and B. rapa, which tended to use more water relative to the other crops as water use decreased. Generally, pea and wheat produced the most grain and biomass, had the highest water use efficiency, and had moderately high to high harvest indices. Wheat and pea are well adapted to variable rainfall amounts inherent in semiarid climates. Desi chickpea and lentil produce good grain yields under dry conditions, and grain yields relative to those of other crops can be increased by some drought stress, especially mid- to late-season stress. Therefore, because of their relatively good performance under water-stressed conditions, they are also well adapted to semiarid climates. Conversely, the Brassica oilseeds yielded relatively poorly compared with wheat and pulse crops under severe water-stressed conditions, so they are not as well adapted to the semiarid climate. In 2001, grain yield of wheat and pulses seeded on stubble was ≥30% of the yield on fallow, whereas stubble-seeded Brassica oilseeds yielded only about 10% of that on fallow. Compared with stubble seeding, production of Brassica oilseeds on fallow will decrease the risk of very low yields under drought. We found little indication that mustard was more drought tolerant than B. napus. Key words: Yield, water use efficiency, oilseeds, pulse, semiarid prairie

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.169 · 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