MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023196548 · doi:10.4141/p00-016

Alternative seeding dates (fall and April) affect <i>Brassica napus</i> canola yield and quality

2000· article· en· W2023196548 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNitrogen and Sulfur Effects on Brassica
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanolaBrassicaSeedingAgronomyBiologySowingYield (engineering)PhenologyGrowing season

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brassica napus L. canola production on the Canadian prairies often is limited by hot, dry growing conditions in early July and a short growing season. Brassica napus canola seeded in the fall just prior to freeze-up or in the early spring as soon as fields are passable may allow canola to avoid these adverse conditions. Our objective was to determine if late October (fall), or mid- to late April (April) seeding dates improve canola yield and quality relative to a mid-May (15 to 20 May) seeding date. Plant density and height, phenological development, seed yield, seed weight and seed oil content were assessed in plots sown to herbicide-tolerant B. napus canola at three seeding dates on five fallow sites and three stubble sites at Scott, SK, from 1994 to 1998. A thinner plant stand occurred for the fall compared with spring seeding dates; however, this difference rarely corresponded with less canola yield. Fifty percent flowering occurred 20 d earlier (June rather than July), reproductive growth (50% flowering to maturity) was 10 d longer, plants were 23 (fall) or 8 (April) cm shorter, and maturity occurred 13 d earlier when canola was seeded in the fall and April compared with mid-May seeding. Canola seed yield was 38% greater when seeded on the alternative dates rather than the more traditional mid-May seeding date. The yield advantage for alternative seeding dates was greater and more consistent on stubble than on fallow likely because of lack of soil crusting and temperature and wind protection from stubble. The response of seed weight to seeding date was similar to that for seed yield, indicating that a portion of the positive yield response to alternative seeding dates was associated with larger seed size. Oil content also was greater for the fall and April compared with mid-May seeding dates, but the improvement was smaller (6%) than that for seed yield. Fall- and April-seed-ed canola tolerated spring frosts and avoided adversely hot, dry weather during the flowering period, thus improving canola seed yield and quality. Alternative seeding dates provide canola producers in semi-arid regions with a sustainable option to diversify their cropping systems. Key words: Seeding date, dormant, stubble, fallow, herbicide tolerant, alternative cropping practice

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it