KAPASITAS TAMPUNG HIJAUAN PAKAN DALAM AREAL PERKEBUNAN KOPI DAN PADANG RUMPUT ALAM DI KABUPATEN FLORES TIMUR NUSA TENGGARA TIMUR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT CARRYING CAPACITY OF FORAGE IN COFFEE FARM AND NATIVE PASTURE AREA AT DISTRICT OF FLORES TIMUR, EAST NUSA TENGGARA. Research was conducted at coffee farm and native pasture area with the objective to measure the production and quality of forage. The research method used was survey method. Primary data were collected at Sub-district of Wulanggitang - District of Flores Timur, particularly in the coffee farm and the native pasture areas. Primary data consisted of production and quality of the native grasses including land fertility -both physical and chemical - in the coffee farm area. On the other hand, secondary data were taken from related institutions cover climate condition and topography. The result showed that potency of forage resources in the Sub-District of Wulanggitang reach 7,664 ton fresh matter/ha for the coffee farm and 6.98 ton fresh matter/ha for the native grasses, respectively. The total production may figure carrying capacity of the coffee farm area is 0.42 UT/ha and 0.38 ST/ha of the native grasses, respectively. In addition, the topography of Wulanggitang Sub-district was about 0 % - > 40 %. Moreover, chemical composition of the forages, mainly crude protein, was 6.95 % in the coffee farm area and 6.65 % in the native pasture area, respectively. It was found that the forages crude protein was very high and available over the livestock minimum needed. Composition of the crude protein was high since the forages are relatively young due to high rainy distribution in a few weeks before taking the sample. However, although the crude composition of the forages in the coffee farm - both quantitatively and qualitatively- was higher than that of the native pasture, its function to support the feed resources was not significant. In conclusion, the potency of the forage resources in those two areas was not support the livestock development especially beef cattle farm at the Sub-district of Wulanggitang when it depends only on the forages of these two areas. Key words: Forage quality, Stocking rate, Coffee farm, Native pasture, Carrying capacity
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".