Selecting Cover Crop Mulches for Organic Rotational No‐Till Systems in Manitoba, Canada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In western Canada, limited research has been conducted on reduced‐tillage grain production systems managed organically. The objective was to select cover crop mulches for an organic rotational no‐till system in Manitoba. A 2‐yr field study (2010–2011, and repeated 2011–2012) was conducted in Carman, MB, Canada. In the cover crop year, 10 different combinations of cover crop species were seeded in the spring, in pure stand or in mixtures, and rolled using a roller‐crimper in mid‐summer, at the flowering stage. These rolled mulches were then left on the soil surface over the fall and winter. The following spring, spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) was seeded directly into these mulches (no‐till). Mulches with hairy vetch ( Vicia villosa Roth) showed the most promising results. Cover crop treatments with vetch had the highest mulch biomass in September of the cover crop year (9.1–10.7 Mg ha −1 ), and in the following spring (6.0–7.6 Mg ha −1 ) and provided the best weed control. In late fall of the cover crop year, N content of mulches with vetch reached high levels (308 kg N ha −1 on average), and high amounts of N (93–164 kg N ha −1 ) were released from these mulches over winter. Organic spring wheat no‐till planted into mulches with vetch produced yields comparable to regional conventional average yields. Mulches with vetch used in an organic rotational no‐till system reduced the need for tillage for a period of 1.5 to 2 yr without affecting yields of organic spring wheat.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 it