Tillage and root heat stress in wheat in central Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heat stress occurs often in wheat on the Canadian Prairies especially during reproductive growth, which has markedly negative impacts on yield. As previous studies reported that wheat growth was affected more by heat stress in roots than in shoot, we suspected that the cooling effect of no-till (NT) on soil may reduce the risk of root heat stress and benefit the yield compared with conventional tillage (CT). Data were collected between 2000 and 2003 from a tillage study using a continuous wheat cropping system on a Thin Black Chernozemic clay loam in central Alberta. Consistently lower soil temperatures at 5 and 10 cm in NT than CT were observed in the whole growing season every year. At the grain growth stage, NT mitigated heat shock (>32°C at 5 cm) which occurred in 2001 and 2002 under CT and considerably reduced root heat stress index (HSI), calculated as accumulations of hourly soil temperatures greater than 20°C, every year compared with CT. By reducing root heat stress especially during the grain growth stage and slightly increasing pre-seeding soil moisture, no-till increased above-ground biomass (33–160%) and grain yield (18–147%) every year except 2003 when heat and water stress were relatively mild. Key words: Heat stress, soil temperature, no-till, conventional tillage, wheat, root
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".