MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049569685 · doi:10.2134/agronj2013.0235

Optimal Irrigation for Onion and Celery Production and Spinach Seed Germination in Histosols

2014· article· en· W2049569685 on OpenAlexafffund
Djamila Rekika, Jean Caron, Guillaume Théroux‐Rancourt, Jonathan A. Lafond, Silvio José Gumière, Sylvie Jenni, André Gosselin

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIrrigation Practices and Water Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMuckIrrigationApium graveolensSpinachHistosolWater potentialAgronomySoil waterAlliumEnvironmental scienceWater contentHorticultureCropChemistryBiologySoil fertilitySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing water scarcity in humid regions requires that food production increase its water use efficiency. Because the hydraulic characteristics of Histosols are different from those of mineral soils, water management for vegetable production must be adapted accordingly. The objective of this research was to determine the optimal soil water potential for irrigating onion (Allium cepa L.), celery (Apium graveolens L.), and spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.) crops in muck soils. Onion and celery were subjected to three irrigation treatments scheduled when tensiometer readings reached –10 or –20 kPa for onion and –30 or –50 kPa (2008) and –15 or –30 kPa (2009) for celery compared with drier control treatments for both crops. For spinach, two irrigation treatments (–10 and –20 kPa) and a control (drier) were tested. Optimal onion marketable yields and jumbo size were obtained from irrigation at potentials above –20 kPa at the bulbing stage. Celery had the best yields with the treatments of 2009 relative to the drier control. The highest spinach germination rate and yield were obtained at –10 kPa. Reliable estimates of the optimal thresholds were consistent with calculations performed using a simple analytical solution to Richards’ equation and soil characteristics. Irrigation thresholds for matric potential in a muck soil were shown to be crop specific and could be derived from a model and basic soil hydraulic characteristics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy JournalSame topicIrrigation Practices and Water ManagementFrench-language works237,207