MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048272800 · doi:10.1300/j064v25n01_09

Biological Efficiency and Economic Benefits of Pea-Barley and Pea-Oat Intercrops

2004· article· en· W2048272800 on OpenAlexaffabout
A. B. Kwabiah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Agriculture · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSativumMonocultureIntercroppingAgronomyHordeum vulgareAvenaBiologyField peaForagePisumVicia sativaPoaceaeHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT To optimize use efficiency of production resources, Newfoundland (NL) dairy farmers intercrop barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and oat (Avena sativa L.) with field pea [Pisum sativum subsp. sativum var. arvense (L.) Poir.]. An experiment was conducted in 2000 and 2001 in a temperate sandy loam to determine seeding rate complementarity of barley and oat in pea-barley and pea-oat intercrops for forage and nitrogen (N) yields. The monocultures of barley and oat were each sown at 85 and 170 kg ha−1, and pea was sown at 150 kg ha−1. For pea-barley and pea-oat intercrops, pea was sown at 150 kg ha−1 and each cereal component was sown at 85 and 170 kg ha−1. The nine treatments were referred to, respectively, as pea150, barley85, oat85, barley170, oat170, pea150-bar-ley85, pea150-oat85, pea150-barley170, and pea150-oat170. The land equivalent ratio (LER), defined as the relative land area under monoculture that is required to produce the yields achieved in intercropping, and its analogues were used to compare biological efficiency and economic benefits that pea-cereal intercrops had over monocultures. There were no significant effects of year and year H treatment interactions on forage and N yield. Barley170 gave the highest forage yield, N yield and net return. Oat85 gave the lowest forage and N yield, and pea150-oat85 gave the lowest net return. Mixing pea with barley or oat significantly reduced the yields of all three component crops relative to the monoculture crop. Reduction in both forage and N yields of pea due to intercropping ranged from 40% in pea150-oat85 to 48% in pea150-oat170. Doubling the seeding rate of barley from 85 to 170 kg ha−1 reduced land advantage in terms of both forage and nitrogen (N) yield, although among the intercrops, pea150-barley170 was the most profitable in forage and N yield, and net economic return. As a result, pea150-barley85 gave the highest land advantage in terms of forage yield and pea150-oat170 gave the highest land and monetary advantage in terms of forage yield and forage N yield.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable AgricultureSame topicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsFrench-language works237,207