Variable crop plant establishment contributes to differences in competitiveness with wild oat among cereal varieties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field experiments were conducted at three locations in Alberta to determine the relative competitiveness with wild oat (Avena fatua L.) of three hard red spring (HRS) and three Canada prairie spring (CPS) wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties and a semidwarf hull-less barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) (Falcon), and normal height general purpose barley (AC Lacombe). Crop variety significantly affected crop yield loss, wild oat shoot dry weight and wild oat seed yield (competitive indicators). AC Lacombe barley was consistently more competitive than Falcon barley or any of the wheat varieties, while the HRS wheat varieties were mainly more competitive than the CPS varieties. Falcon barley was generally similar in competitiveness to the CPS wheat varieties. Differences among varieties in crop plant density at establishment correlated significantly with the competitive indicators suggesting that this factor contributed to the differences in competitiveness among the varieties. Crop density tended to be higher with the more competitive AC Lacombe barley and HRS wheat varieties than with the less competitive Falcon barley and CPS wheat varieties. Variety and seeding rate did not interact significantly but intentionally increasing the seeding rate improved the competitiveness of all varieties. Key words: Hard red spring wheat, Canada prairie spring wheat, crop seeding rate, hull-less barley, semi-dwarf wheat and barley
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".