MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096861925 · doi:10.1300/j064v19n02_04

Sweet Corn Tillage-Planting Systems in a Humid Maritime Climate of British Columbia

2001· article· en· W2096861925 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maja Kržić, Marie-Claude Fortin, A. A. Bomke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Agriculture · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTillageAgronomyCover cropSpring (device)Environmental scienceSowingCropMulch-tillYield (engineering)Biomass (ecology)No-till farmingBiologySoil waterSoil fertility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conservation, no spring tillage (NST) and conventional, spring tillage (ST) using winter wheat and spring barley cover crops were evaluated for soil cover, soil temperature, and sweet corn production in the western Fraser Valley of British Columbia for three years. Spring barley and winter wheat provided enough biomass for an average soil coverage of 44 and 60%, respectively, and to maintain soil temperature above the minimum required for corn germination and emergence. High NST slug populations, following mild winters, led to crop failure in two of three years. The only satisfactory NST sweet corn yield (19.2 t ha−1) was obtained when there was no slug damage. The NST system requires modifications, such as inclusion of some form of integrated pest management or shallow spring tillage and/or different drill type, to become an alternative to conventional sweet corn production in the humid maritime climate of the western Fraser Valley.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable AgricultureSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207