Tolerance of common buckwheat (<i>Fagopyrum esculentum</i>) to low rates of 2,4-D and MCPA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field studies were conducted from 1995 to 1997 at Morden and Brandon, Manitoba, Canada, to evaluate the effect of crop growth stage at application on common buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum Moench.) tolerance to low rates of 2,4-D amine, MCPA amine and the sodium salt of MCPA. Each formulation was applied at 140 g a.i. ha−1 to common buckwheat at the two- to three-leaf, four- to five-leaf, and six- to eight-leaf stages. Levels of buckwheat injury and seed yield loss were very similar for the three phenoxy herbicide formulations. Although early-season crop injury was severe, injury was often less, and crop recovery from injury greater, when herbicide was applied at the two-leaf stage than at the four-leaf or six-leaf stage. When herbicide was applied at the two-leaf stage, a significant yield reduction occurred in only one of the five trials. However, buckwheat seed yield decreased when phenoxy-herbicide application was delayed past the two-leaf stage. If low application rates of phenoxy herbicides to early stage buckwheat are effective in suppressing weed growth, then this treatment may enable the crop to out-compete weeds without sustaining yield losses in most years. Key words: Common buckwheat, tolerance, crop growth stage, yield, phenoxy herbicide
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 | 0.000 | 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".