Chaff collection reduces seed dispersal of wild oat (<i>Avena fatua</i>) by a combine harvester
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Combine harvesters have the potential to disperse weed seeds great distances. Reducing this dispersal may be important in an integrated weed management system. The objectives of this study were to determine the distance that wild oat seeds are dispersed by a combine harvester and the effect of chaff collection on combine harvester seed dispersal. This was measured by sampling wild oat seeds at varying distances behind a combine equipped with a removable chaff collection system after it passed through a wild oat patch. Chaff collection consistently reduced the amount and distance that wild oat seeds were dispersed. This occurred because more than 74% of the total wild oat seed that were ejected from the combine were in the chaff. Because most of the chaff falls in a row directly behind the combine, chaff collection only affected dispersal in this area. In 1996, chaff collection reduced wild oat seed dispersal past the wild oat patch to less than 10 seeds m −2 at 45 m, whereas without chaff collection, there was greater than 10 seeds m −2 up to 145 m. At distances beyond 145 m, chaff collection had no significant effect on seed dispersal. Chaff collection may be an important tool in an integrated weed management program because it may slow weed invasions and reduce the expansion of weed patches.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it