MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058894792 · doi:10.2134/agronj2013.0089

Apparent Red Clover Nitrogen Credit to Corn: Evaluating Cover Crop Introduction

2013· article· en· W2058894792 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRed CloverCover cropAgronomyLegumeCropCrop rotationAgricultureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corn ( Zea mays L.) production systems can benefit from introducing a leguminous winter cover crop into the rotation, especially with regard to increased N availability (i.e., legume N credit); however, it is not known if the full agronomic benefit is realized in the first year of cover crop introduction or if the benefit is cumulative with time. The objective of this study was to determine the apparent red clover ( Trifolium pratense L.) N credit to corn in a conventional system where red clover was introduced for the first time compared with three agricultural systems that had a 14‐yr history of using cover crops. The apparent red clover N credit was calculated by the difference in unfertilized corn N accumulation between cover and no‐cover split‐split plots. These data suggest that corn growers can realize the full benefits of a red clover cover crop in the first year of introduction.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.227 · 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