Eight years of crop rotation and tillage effects on crop production and N fertilizer use
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
Although tillage systems and crop rotations can affect crop production and uptake of nutrients, their long-term effects, particularly their interactions, are not well-documented. Therefore, we measured the N, P, and K contents and yields of crops through two rotation cycles, especially wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), of four crop rotations managed under conventional tillage (CT) and no-tillage (NT) systems. The study was conducted 1993 through 2000 on a sandy loam soil in northwestern Alberta, Canada. The four-course crop rotations were: (i) field pea (Pisum sativum L.)-wheat-canola (Brassica rapa L.)-wheat; (ii) red clover (Trifolium pratense L.) green manure-wheat-canola-wheat; (iii) fallow-wheat-canola-wheat, and (iv) continuous wheat (CW). The crops were fertilized using regional recommendations based on soil test results. Previous crop effect on wheat yield was in the order: field pea = red clover green manure > fallow > canola > wheat (CW); it had little influence on N, P or K content in wheat grain or straw. There was no interaction of tillage with crop rotation on wheat production or nutrient content. Tillage treatments affected neither production of other rotation crops nor their nutrient concentrations. During the second rotation cycle, N fertilizer requirement decreased, and wheat yield was 22% higher, under NT as compared to CT. This study showed that (i) field pea is an attractive replacement for red clover green manure; and (ii) recommendations for N from soil test results should factor in the type of tillage system used. Key words: Canola, field pea, red clover, nitrogen, tillage, 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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