Early seeding dates improve oat yield and quality in the eastern prairies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Demand for high quality oat (Avena sativa L.) for consumption by humans and race horses has increased, leading to increased oat production on the Canadian prairies. Little information exists on the best management practices for producing high-quality, high-yielding oat using direct seeding systems and cropping practices developed and adopted over the past 15 yr. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of early seeding on grain yield and quality of oat cultivars currently grown in the eastern prairie region. Four seeding dates and four cultivars were tested at Indian Head, Melfort, and Brandon over 3 yr. Moving the seeding date from mid-June to early May increased oat yield, seeds per panicle, kernel weight, test weight and plump seed by 76, 33, 10, 13 and 11%, respectively, when averaged across all locations and years. This increase in yield and quality was probably due to improved environmental conditions and a reduction in crown rust infection (Puccina coronata Corda). Crown rust has a larger effect on seed yield and quality as one moves east and south from Melfort, Saskatchewan, and as seeding was delayed from early May. Early seeding of oat decreases the risk of obtaining low yield and/or quality, and should be considered a best management practice for growing milling oats, especially in the southeastern prairies of Canada. Key words: Yield components, test weight, oat, Puccina coronata, lodging, plump seed, thin seed
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".