MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153161740 · doi:10.1614/ws-03-104r

Nitrogen fertilizer timing and application method affect weed growth and competition with spring wheat

2004· article· en· W2153161740 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWeed Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWeed Control and Herbicide Applications
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeedAgronomySowingFertilizerAmmonium nitrateCropWeed controlNitrogenFoxtailBiomass (ecology)LambsquartersField experimentCrop yieldEnvironmental scienceBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Managing crop fertilization may be an important component of integrated weed management systems that protect crop yield and reduce weed populations over time. A field study was conducted to determine the effects of various timings and application methods of nitrogen (N) fertilizer on weed growth and spring wheat yield. Nitrogen fertilizer was applied the previous fall (October) or at planting (May) at a dose of 50 kg ha −1 . Nitrogen application treatments consisted of granular ammonium nitrate applied broadcast on the soil surface, banded 10 cm deep between every crop row, banded 10 cm deep between every second crop row, or point-injected liquid ammonium nitrate placed between every second crop row at 20-cm intervals and 10 cm deep. Treatments were applied in 4 consecutive yr to determine annual and cumulative effects over years. Density and biomass of wild oat, green foxtail, wild mustard, and common lambsquarters were sometimes lower with spring- than with fall-applied N. Spring wheat yield was never lower and was higher in 50% of the cases, when N was spring rather than fall applied. Nitrogen application method generally had larger and more consistent effects than application timing on weed growth and wheat yield. Shoot N concentration and biomass of weeds were often lower with subsurface banded or point-injected N than with surface broadcast N, and concurrent increases in spring wheat yield usually occurred with these N placement treatments. Depending on the weed species, the weed seedbank at the conclusion of the 4-yr study was reduced by 25 to 63% with point-injected compared with broadcast N. Information gained in this study will contribute to the development of more integrated and cost-effective weed management programs in wheat.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · 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