Nitrogen Fertilizer and Urease Inhibitor Effects on Canola Emergence and Yield in a One‐Pass Seeding and Fertilizing System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field studies were conducted over 3 yr at two locations on the eastern Canadian prairies to evaluate the impact of urea and urea ammonium nitrate (UAN) placed near the seed‐row in a one‐pass seeding and fertilizing operation on seedling damage, biomass yield at flowering, and final seed yield of canola ( Brassica napus L.). Seedling damage occurred in canola with increasing rates of urea or UAN fertilizer applied as a side‐band targeted to place the fertilizer placed 2.5 cm to the side and 2.5 cm below the seed row at the time of seeding. Decrease in stand density with UAN was similar to that resulting from urea application. The urease inhibitor (UI) N‐(n‐butyl) thiophosphoric triamide (NBPT) decreased seedling damage in canola from both urea and UAN fertilizer. Dry matter yield at flowering was only rarely affected by seedling damage, but NBPT increased canola seed yield at high rates of N application in three of six site‐years and decreased seed yield at one site‐year. Chlorophyll concentration in the seed increased as stand density decreased, indicating a negative effect of seedling damage on both maturity and seed quality. Caution should be used to ensure that seed and fertilizer separation is adequate and safe rates of N application are not exceeded when fertilizer is banded near the seed‐row. Use of NBPT can reduce the risk of seedling damage and increase the amount of urea or UAN that can safely be side‐banded in a one‐pass seeding and fertilizing operation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".