MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104690527 · doi:10.4141/p99-020

Influence of tillage type on vertical weed seedbank distribution in a sandy soil

2000· article· en· W2104690527 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWeed Control and Herbicide Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPloughTillageAgronomyWeedChiselEnvironmental scienceSoil typeMathematicsSoil scienceSoil waterGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vertical distribution of weed seeds in the seedbank of a sandy soil under three tillage systems (moldboard plow, chisel plow, and no-till) was estimated by a seedling-emergence method. The vertical distribution of the weed seedbank differed with tillage type and depth of tillage. The no-till system had the largest portion (90%) of the seedbank in the 0- to 5-cm layer. Chisel plowing distributed most of the seeds (66%) in the 5- to 10-cm layer. Moldboard plowing concentrated 71% of the seeds at the 10- to 15-cm depth. Our results suggest that the vertical distribution of the weed seedbank will be influenced by tillage type, depth of tillage, and soil type. Key words: Soil structure, moldboard plow, chisel plow, no-till

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.189 · 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