Differences in Wheat Cultivar Response to N Supply. I: Differences in Grain Yield Formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Two‐year field trials with winter wheat cultivars Batis and Toronto were conducted in Southern Bavaria, Germany, to investigate the possible causes of cultivar differences in response to N supply varying in total amount and time of application. Cultivar‐related differences in grain yields were observed in treatments with low and medium N supply. High doses of N supply resulted in grain yield adjustment or grain yield advantage for cv. Toronto. The results of this study revealed a consistent, genotypic pattern in response to N fertilization in spite of strong seasonal effects. Systematic modifications in canopy growth rates in response to N supply were of particular relevance and a main factor for differences in tillering intensity resulting in modified stand densities. In the present study, cultivar differences in spike development and interactions with N supply related more to abortion than to initiation processes for number of spikelets and number of flowers per spikelet. High grain density (grains per m 2 ) of cv. Toronto was evident during reproduction stages even under conditions of medium N supply. However, decreased growth rates during the later part of grain filling in combination with low 1000 grain weight, which was barely modified by N fertilization, allowed only partial utilization of this potential. It is assumed that sink limitations were of particular relevance for grain yield development in cv. Toronto, while cv. Batis combined a less intense response to N supply with more stability in the development of grain yield components.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".