Plant Competition Effects on the Nitrogen Economy of Field Pea and the Subsequent Crop
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluated weed competition effects on the N economy of field pea ( Pisum sativum L.) and the subsequent crop to address the paucity of such information. Plots were seeded to pea, canola ( Brassica napus L.) and barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.) in 1997 and 1998. Weeds, augmented by cross‐seeding experimental plots with oat (Avena sativa L.), were removed with herbicides one and four weeks after crop emergence (WAE). The subsequent barley crop received 0 or 6 g N m −2 Mean percentage of N derived from the atmosphere (%Ndfa) for the 2 yr, estimated by 15 N isotopic dilution, was 81% for the 4‐WAE treatment and 51% for the 1‐WAE treatment, indicating that a pea plant subjected to greater weed competition derived more of its N from symbiotic fixation. Total N fixed by pea was not affected by the time of weed removal, however, and total N uptake and seed yield were greater with early weed removal due to less competition for soil N. Early weed removal resulted in net N export in pea seeds (because of higher production) while later weed removal resulted in gains of 1.1 to 1.3 g N m −2 However, time of weed removal during pea cultivation had no effect on the yield or N uptake of the subsequent barley crop. Higher barley yield and N uptake following pea than following barley were mostly the result of greater N availability. Nitrogen fertilization benefited the subsequent barley regardless of preceding crop type.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".