Productivity of FieldPea (Pisumsativum L.) and Spring Oat (Avena sativa L.) Grown as Sole and Intercrops Under Different Nitrogen Levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intercropping cereal grains and legumes has potential as an alternative cool-season forage cropin low-input farming systems. The objectives of this study were to quantify the effects of density, species proportion and nitrogen (N) supply on the biomass accumulation of field pea and spring oat grown as sole or intercrops. Greenhouse experiments were conducted using an additive series experimental design. Treatments included threefertilizer Nrates and 20 density/proportion combinationsin a randomized complete block with four replications. Sole plant densities included 2, 3, 4, 5 plants of each species pot-1 (16 cm in diameter, 16 cm in height). The species ratios per pot for the intercrop included 1:1, 1:2, 1:3, 1:4, 2:2, 2:3, and 3:5 and their reciprocals. Nitrogentreatments included urea at 0, 0.2, or 1.0 g N pot-1in a split application. Plants were harvested and oven dried to constant weight at 46 days after planting. As density increased, sole cropped oat and fieldpea biomass increased. In the intercrop, oat showed greater biomass accumulation at higher N levels, whereas field pea biomass was reduced at the highest N level. In both sole and intercrop, oat was more sensitive to intraspecific competition than field pea. Niche differentiation was only observed at the highest N level. At higher N and lower total density, mixtures yielded more than monocultures, indicating that intercropping of field pea and spring oat may be beneficial. Results from this study can aid in future field research to determine optimum density for each species and N rates to be applied in field pea-oat intercropping systems.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".