MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118101142 · doi:10.1614/ws-d-15-00133.1

Diverse Rotations and Optimal Cultural Practices Control Wild Oat (<i>Avena fatua</i>)

2015· article· en· W2118101142 on OpenAlexafffundabout
K. Neil Harker, John T. O’Donovan, T. Kelly Turkington, Robert E. Blackshaw, Newton Z. Lupwayi, Elwin G. Smith, Eric N. Johnson, Denis Pageau, Steven J. Shirtliffe, Robert H. Gulden, J. Rowsell, Linda M. Hall, Christian J. Willenborg

Bibliographic record

VenueWeed Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWeed Control and Herbicide Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of GuelphUniversity of SaskatchewanAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersWestern Grains Research Foundation
KeywordsAvena fatuaAgronomyCanolaBiologyWeedCrop rotationWeed controlCropGlufosinateGlyphosate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In western Canada, more money is spent on wild oat herbicides than on any other weed species, and wild oat resistance to herbicides is the most widespread resistance issue. A direct-seeded field experiment was conducted from 2010 to 2014 at eight Canadian sites to determine crop life cycle, crop species, crop seeding rate, crop usage, and herbicide rate combination effects on wild oat management and canola yield. Combining 2× seeding rates of early-cut barley silage with 2× seeding rates of winter cereals and excluding wild oat herbicides for 3 of 5 yr (2011 to 2013) often led to similar wild oat density, aboveground wild oat biomass, wild oat seed density in the soil, and canola yield as a repeated canola–wheat rotation under a full wild oat herbicide rate regime. Wild oat was similarly well managed after 3 yr of perennial alfalfa without wild oat herbicides. Forgoing wild oat herbicides in only 2 of 5 yr from exclusively summer annual crop rotations resulted in higher wild oat density, biomass, and seed banks. Management systems that effectively combine diverse and optimal cultural practices against weeds, and limit herbicide use, reduce selection pressure for weed resistance to herbicides and prolong the utility of threatened herbicide tools.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations40
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWeed ScienceSame topicWeed Control and Herbicide ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207