MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2241629270 · doi:10.33584/jnzg.2000.62.2365

Timothy - the plant and its use on New Zealand farms

2000· article· en· W2241629270 on OpenAlexaff
J. F. L. Charlton, Alan V. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsGreenfield Research (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPasturePerennial plantGrazingTiller (botany)AgronomyTemperate climateLolium perenneHayBiologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Timothy is an important pasture species in many cool-temperate regions of the world, particularly those with cold winters and moist summers. In New Zealand, this perennial grass has been used traditionally for mixed pasture in cool moist areas of the southern South Island. It is valued for hay as it retains good feed quality even when seedheads are present. Timothy's flowering and tillering response is different from perennial ryegrass, leading to a high tiller turnover in summer and making it vulnerable to mismanagement, pests and drought. Timothy's inherent digestibility and quality is no greater than perennial ryegrass but because of its late flowering nature, its quality is retained longer in pastures. This, combined with its lack of endophyte and higher clover content, commonly allows a greater animal performance from pastures. This paper reviews timothy's features and onfarm performance, explains how its features produce its characteristic performance, and considers its potential in current New Zealand grazing systems in different regions. Keywords: grazing, pasture, seeds mixtures, timothy

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)0.000
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 score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the New Zealand Grassland AssociationSame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207