MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139353997 · doi:10.5539/jas.v4n10p12

Yield Performance of Popcorn (Zea mays L. everta) under Lime and Nitrogen Fertilization on an Acid Soil

2012· article· en· W2139353997 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emmanuel Bassey Effa, D. F. Uwah, G. A. Iwo, Ekemini Edet Obok, G. O. Ukoha

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCrop Yield and Soil Fertility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimeYield (engineering)SowingHuman fertilizationNitrogenField experimentAnimal scienceAgronomyAmendmentCropMathematicsSoil pHHorticultureSoil waterChemistryBiologyEcologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A two-year field experiment was carried out on the acidic coastal plain sands of South Eastern Nigeria during the year 2009 and 2010 planting seasons to study the effect of lime levels (L = 0, 500 and 1000 kg ha-1) and nitrogen rates (N = 0, 40, 80 and 120 kg ha-1) on -popcorn varieties (Yellow composite and Ashland). Results showed that N application resulted in significantly (p=0.05) higher grain yield at 80kg N ha-1 in 2010 than that obtained at 120 kg Nha-1 in 2009. Yield in 2010 outstripped yield in 2009 by 23.65%. Results also showed that lime at 500 kg ha-1 gave the highest popcorn yields in 2010, a yield increase of 18.03 % above control, whereas there was no yield response to lime in 2009. Based on the results obtained, it can be concluded that popcorn sown at 80 kg N ha-1 and 500 kg ha-1 rates of lime significantly increased the crop productivity compared to those sown at other N and lime rates. The study demonstrated the effect of lime amendment in reducing rates of inorganic N applied to popcorn especially with resource poor farmers who form the bulk of maize producers in Nigeria.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicCrop Yield and Soil FertilityFrench-language works237,207