MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133203575 · doi:10.4141/p04-064

Tolerance of kidney beans (<i>Phaseolus vulgaris</i>) to bentazon alone and when mixed with imazamox

2005· article· en· W2133203575 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Nader Soltani, Christy Shropshire, Peter H. Sikkema

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWeed Control and Herbicide Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBentazonPhaseolusCultivarYield (engineering)HorticultureDry beanAgronomyCropChemistryBiologyWeed control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tolerance of Montcalm and Redhawk kidney beans to bentazon, imazamox plus fomesafen and imazamox plus bentazon applied postemergence at the maximum label rate in soybeans and twice that rate were studied at two Ontario locations (Exeter and Ridgetown) in 2001 and 2002. There were no differences between the two cultivars in their response to the herbicides tested. At Exeter in 2001, bentazon reduced plant height by 10 and 12% and yield by 33 and 22% at the label and twice that rate, respectively. Yield was also reduced by 11% at Exeter in 2002 at twice the label rate. Imazamox plus fomesafen reduced plant height equally by 14% and yield was reduced by 22 and 30% at the label rate and twice the label rate, respectively, at Exeter in 2001. Imazamox plus bentazon in Exeter in 2001 reduced plant height equally by 8% and yield by 20 and 14% at the label rate and twice the label rate, respectively. There were no negative effects on plant height, dry weight and yield at the other site-yrs. This research suggests that bentazon, imazamox plus fomesafen and imazamox plus bentazon applied postemergence can cause severe crop injury and yield reduction in kidney bean production under certain environmental conditions. Key words: Bentazon, crop tolerance, fomesafen; imazamox, Montcalm, Phaseolus vulgaris, Redhawk.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicWeed Control and Herbicide ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207