MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2195046799 · doi:10.5539/eer.v5n2p36

Does Deficit Irrigation Affect the Relation between Radiation Interception and Water Consumption for Durum Wheat (Triticum durum Desf)?

2015· article· en· W2195046799 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mourad Rezig, Hatem Cheikh M’hamed, M’barek Ben Naceur

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy and Environment Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRice Cultivation and Yield Improvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater-use efficiencyIrrigationDry matterAnimal sciencePhotosynthetically active radiationChemistryAgronomyPhotosynthesisBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="4Body">Total Dray Matter (TDM), Photosynthetically Active Radiation Intercepted (PARabs), Water Consumption (WC), Water use- (WUE), Radiation use efficiency (RUE) and the Relation between Radiation Interception and Water Consumption for Durum Wheat were investigate under different irrigation amount (D<sub>1</sub>= 100 % ETc; D<sub>2</sub>= 70 % ETc; D<sub>3</sub>= 40 % ETc and D<sub>4</sub>= pluvial) and during three growing seasons (2005-2006, 2006-2007 and 2007-2008). Results showed that, the cumulative PARabs decreased with deficit irrigation. In fact, D<sub>1</sub> treatment recorded the highest cumulative PAR abs and the lowest marked under D<sub>4</sub> treatment. Similarly, TDM and RUE were decreased with deficit irrigation. The highest RUE observed under the D<sub>1</sub> (from 1.32 to 1.43 g MJ<sup>-1</sup>) and the lowest under D<sub>4</sub> (from 1.17 to 1.29 g MJ<sup>-1</sup>). However WUE increased with deficit irrigation. The highest WUE were obtained under the D<sub>4</sub> (from 3 to 4 kg m<sup>-3</sup>) and the lowest were observed under D<sub>1</sub> (from 2.8 to 3.1 kg m<sup>-3</sup>). Significant linear relationship was found between cumulative PAR abs and cumulative water consumption with a high correlation coefficient (R<sup>2</sup>) only under the two treatments D<sub>1</sub> and D<sub>2</sub>.</p>

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy and Environment ResearchSame topicRice Cultivation and Yield ImprovementFrench-language works237,207