MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075886240 · doi:10.4141/p06-108

Potassium management for carrots in Prince Edward Island

2006· article· en· W2075886240 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kevin Sanderson, J. B. Sanderson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGarlic and Onion Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDaucus carotaLoamPotashSoil waterPotassiumCultivarHorticulturePodzolAgronomyChemistryCropField experimentAnimal scienceMathematicsBiologyEnvironmental scienceSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nine field studies were conducted over a 3-yr period to determine the response of carrot (Daucus carota L.) to soilapplied K on sandy to loamy sand Orthic Podzol soils in Prince Edward Island (PEI), Canada. Mid-season soil K levels ranged from 34 to 103 µg g -1 , and sites were classified as L– (very low), L (low) and M (medium) (Mehlich 3 extractable) according to the PEI Soil and Feed Testing Laboratory. Cultivars used were Imperator-type and the crops were managed to conform to local growing practices. Treatments consisted of preplant broadcast applied muriate of potash (KCl) at 0, 75, 150, 225 or 300 kg K ha -1 . When no K was applied, total carrot yields on the L–, L and M soil K ratings were 70, 90 and 98% of the maximum yield, respectively. To achieve 95% of the maximum yield, 150, 75 and 0 kg K ha -1 were required on the L–, L and M soils, respectively. Increasing rates of applied K linearly increased the K content of carrot petioles and soil samples taken at harvest. Potassium content in the carrot roots increased linearly with the rate of applied K, but parallel line analyses indicated that separate K response lines were required for each K soil test rating. Rates of 300, 150 and 75 kg K ha -1 were required to increase root K content to above the published standard of 27 mg g -1 (DM basis) on the L–, L, and M soil K sites, respectively. Key words: Carrot, potassium, soil K rating, nutrient content, 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicGarlic and Onion StudiesFrench-language works237,207