MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2161795994 · doi:10.4141/p04-154

Effects of relative time of emergence and density of wild oat (<i>Avena fatua</i> L.) on oat quality

2005· article· en· W2161795994 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christian J. Willenborg, B. G. Rossnagel, William E. May, G. P. Lafond, Steven J. Shirtliffe

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCrop Yield and Soil Fertility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAvena fatuaAvenaAgronomyBiologyCompetition (biology)Kernel (algebra)Grain qualityMathematicsWeedEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selective control of wild oat with herbicides is not possible in oat (Avena sativa L.) crops and, consequently, the high quality that is imperative to market success is continually jeopardized. Field experiments were conducted to determine the effects of relative time of emergence and density of wild oat on oat kernel size and weight. Thousand-kernel weight and percentage plump kernels were generally reduced, and percentage thin kernels were generally increased with increasing wild oat densities and earlier wild oat emergence. However, reductions were generally small and occurred only at the highest wild oat densities, which are not commonly observed in commercial fields. These findings suggest that oat growers should not control wild oat based on perceived reductions in oat physical grain quality. Key words: Competition, emergence, physical grain quality, test weight, 1000-kernel weight

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.210
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant Science→Same topicCrop Yield and Soil Fertility→French-language works237,207→