Effect of Row and Plant Spacing on Seed Production of <i>Eryngium Foetidum</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The experiment was conducted at the Horticulture Field Laboratory of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University during December 2007 to July 2008 under upland condition to observe the seed production potentiality of Eryngium foetidum at different spacing. Individual plant performance, flower stalk size, number of inflorescence, seeds/inflorescence and thousand seed weight were higher in wider spacing but marketable fresh yield and seed yield per unit area was better in medium (10 cm×10 cm) spacing. The spacing 10 cm×10cm gave the maximum profitability including fresh plant and seed yield. The maximum fresh yield was obtained from 15 cm×15 cm spacing (16.23 t/ha) while the highest seed yield was recorded in 10 cm×10 cm spacing (136.3 kg/ha). The maximum gross return (Tk. 0.75 million/ha) and BCR (4.76) were obtained from 10 cm×10 cm spacing.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".