Fertilisation phosphatée et potassique dans la culture du pois sec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Quebec, the P recommendations for dry peas (Pisum sativum L.) are nearly three times higher than those in western Canada, while recommendations for K are at least 20% lower. The objective of this project was to re-evaluate the P and K needs of dry peas under the climatic conditions of the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region (Quebec, Canada) in soils with a range of soil P and K availabilities. The treatments consisted of four P rates (0, 20, 40, 80 and 160 kg P2O5 ha–1) and three K rates (0, 50 and 150 kg K2O ha–1). The trials were conducted at two sites over 3 yr. Site 1 was classified as low in P availability and site 2 as medium according to the soil analysis. Both sites had a medium level of soil K availability. Grain yields increased significantly, by 6%, with increasing fertilizer P (3246 to 3437 kg ha–1). Potassium fertilization had no significant effect on grain yields. Grain yields were also 37% higher in the highest soil P site. This low response of the crop to mineral fertilizers was attributed to the significant soil contribution to crop P and K needs. Soil tests have also indicated an enrichment of P and K with large inputs of mineral fertilizers. Thus, a rate of 30-35 kg P2O5 ha–1 for P poor soils would be sufficient to meet the crop needs. For soils with moderate levels of K (201-400 kg K ha–1), a rate of 50 kg K2O ha–1 would be sufficient to meet the crop needs and to maintain the soil fertility. Key words: Enrichment, efficiency, phosphorus, potassium, Pisum sativum L.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".