Modeling site-specific wild oat (<i>Avena fatua</i>) emergence across a variable landscape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spatial and temporal pattern of wild oat emergence in eastern Washington is affected by the steep, rolling hills that dominate this landscape. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of landscape position and crop residue on the emergence phenology of wild oat. Emergence of a natural wild oat infestation was characterized over two growing seasons (2003 and 2004), at two wheat residue levels (0 and 500 g m−2), and at five landscape positions differing in slope, aspect, and elevation in a no-till winter wheat field. Wild oat emerged 1 to 2 wk earlier at south-facing landscape positions than at north-facing landscape positions. Crop residue delayed wild oat emergence by 7 to 13 d relative to bare soil at south-facing positions in 2003 and had a reduced effect on emergence at north-facing landscape positions. Therefore, preserving surface residues tended to synchronize emergence across the landscape and may facilitate better timing of weed control where residue is present. Emergence of wild oat was modeled as a function of thermal time adjusted by water potential using a Weibull function. Temperature explained more variation in the model than water potential. This model explained much of the variability in wild oat emergence among landscape positions over these 2 yr and may be useful as a tool to predict the timing of wild oat emergence. Results also indicate that site-specific modeling is a plausible approach to improving prediction of weed seedling emergence.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".