Influence of Seeding Rate, Nitrogen Management, and Micronutrient Blend Applications on Pith Expression in Solid‐Stemmed Spring Wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The wheat stem sawfly ( Cephus cinctus Norton [Hymenoptera: Cephidae]) is a serious threat to wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) and other cereal grains in the northern Great Plains. Wheat cultivars with high expression of pith in the culm of the stem (stem solidity) can minimize losses associated with sawfly infestations and subsequent stem boring of the larva. Based on the widespread area now sown to solid‐stemmed wheat, our objective was to develop an integrated nutrient and planting strategy specific to solid‐stemmed spring wheat using modern farming techniques. Five levels of banded N fertilizer (0, 30, 60, 90, and 120 kg N ha −1 ) were arranged in a factorial combination with three levels of sowing density (100, 300, and 500 seeds m −2 ) and grown at three sites in southern Alberta, Canada, from 2007 to 2009. Increased planting densities optimized yield, but an inverse relationship with pith expression (stem solidness) was observed. Low plant populations (100 seeds m −2 ) were often most effective at maximizing pith expression in solid‐stemmed wheat and reducing sawfly cutting damage. However, this usually required the highest rates of N fertilizer, so a system of low seeding rates and high N may not be economical based on fertilizer input costs and the generally lower grain yield response (−9%). An integrated planting and nutrient strategy for solid‐stemmed spring wheat cultivars consists of seeding rates no greater than 300 seeds m −2 and basal N applications in the range of 30 to 60 kg N ha −1 .
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".