MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114550442 · doi:10.21273/hortsci.42.1.110

Response of Eight Sweet Corn (Zea mays L.) Hybrids to Topramezone

2007· article· en· W2114550442 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nader Soltani, Peter H. Sikkema, J.W. Zandstra, John O’Sullivan, Darren E. Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueHortScience · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWeed Control and Herbicide Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHybridBiologyZea maysAgronomyWeedHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Topramezone is a newly introduced herbicide for use in field corn ( Zea mays L.) that may have potential for weed management in sweet corn. Tolerance of eight sweet corn hybrids to topramezone applied postemergence (POST) at 0, 50, 75, 100, 150, and 300 g a.i. ha − 1 were studied at one Ontario location in 2000 and two locations in 2001 and 2002. Topramezone applied POST at 50, 75, 100, and 150 g·ha − 1 did not cause any visual injury in Calico Belle, CNS 710, Delmonte 2038, FTF 222, FTF 246, GH 2684, Reveille, and Rival sweet corn hybrids at 7 days after treatment (DAT) and caused minimal injury (less than 5%) at 300 g·ha − 1 in all hybrids. The initial sensitivity observed in these hybrids was minimal and transient with no effect on visual injury at 14 and 28 DAT. Topramezone applied POST did not reduce plant height, cob size, or marketable yield of the sweet corn hybrids included in this study. Based on these results, topramezone applied POST at the rates evaluated can be safely applied to Calico Belle, CNS 710, Delmonte 2038, FTF 222, FTF 246, GH 2684, Reveille, and Rival sweet corn.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations24
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHortScienceSame topicWeed Control and Herbicide ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207