MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046121885 · doi:10.4141/cjps09187

Commercial generations of <i>Brassica napus</i> cause greater yield loss in <i>Triticum aestivum</i>, than volunteer <i>B. napus</i> generations

2010· article· en· W2046121885 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Nicole J. Seerey, Steven J. Shirtliffe

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBrassicaVolunteerSeedlingWeedCompetition (biology)AgronomyBiologyCanolaYield (engineering)RapeseedWeed controlHybridSowing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Volunteer canola (Brassica napus L.) has become a common weed in producer fields, due to the large area cropped, and inherent harvest losses. Commonly grown B. napus varieties which segregate in subsequent generations to create volunteers with unknown competitive capabilities are developed by hybrid genetics. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of volunteer B. napus variety and generation on competition yield loss in hard red spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Two hybrid and one open-pollinated B. napus varieties with three consecutive generations produced from each variety were grown at varying densities in a wheat stand over 5 site-years. Yield loss depended on the density of B. napus in relation to total plant density. Generational differences in B. napus seedlings resulted in differences in wheat yield losses. Brassica napus densities at maturity provided a more robust model of wheat yield loss, as there were differences in wheat yield losses due to the interaction of generation and variety of B. napus. Commercial seed generations were the most competitive plants, while volunteer generations were less competitive. The amount of yield loss caused by volunteer B. napus was highly variable. The availability of low-priced herbicides, and the competitive ability of volunteer B. napus may allow for economic thresholds concerning weed control to be surpassed at low densities of volunteer B. napus populations. Key words: Competition, hybrid, open-pollinated, volunteer weed, seedling mortality, mature density, seedling density, feral

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicGenetically Modified Organisms ResearchFrench-language works237,207