MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162482149 · doi:10.2134/agronj2001.1262

Nitrogen Fertilization and Rhizobial Inoculation Effects on Kura Clover Growth

2001· article· en· W2162482149 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Séguin, Craig C. Sheaffer, Nancy Ehlke, Michael P. Russelle, Peter H. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersUniversity of Minnesota
KeywordsAgronomySeedingRhizobiaHuman fertilizationLoamInoculationMicrobial inoculantBiologyDry matterFertilizerNitrogen fixationHorticultureSoil waterBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kura clover ( Trifolium ambiguum M.B.) is a persistent, rhizomatous forage legume; however, its use is currently limited by slow establishment. We determined the effects of rhizobial inoculation and N fertilization on kura clover growth and N 2 fixation in the seeding year. Kura clover was seeded with or without a commercial rhizobial inoculant and with and without N fertilization in three environments. Fertilization treatments consisted of 100 kg N ha −1 either applied at seeding or split in 10 kg N ha −1 applications every other week after seeding. Nitrogen fertilization increased seeding‐year herbage accumulation in all locations, but the response to fertilizer N was greater on a loamy sand with low organic matter and available N than on a silt loam with high soil organic matter. Rhizobial inoculation failed to consistently improve seeding‐year herbage accumulation compared with no inoculation; a positive response was observed in only one of three environments. Dry matter accumulation responses of root and rhizome to N fertilization and rhizobial inoculation were similar to that of herbage. Dinitrogen fixation in the seeding year varied between 9 and 25 kg ha −1 fixed N, depending on the environment. Seeding‐year inoculation increased postseeding year herbage yield. Also, when a positive response to N fertilization occurred in the seeding year, the response was maintained in the postseeding year. A commercial rhizobial inoculant was ineffective in establishing adequate nodulation in the seeding year in a N‐limited soil, indicating the need to identify more effective rhizobia for kura clover.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy JournalSame topicLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisFrench-language works237,207