Growth, Yield and Yield Components of Pineapple in a Pineapple-Pepper-Cowpea Intercropping System
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of time of sowing cowpea into pineapple-pepper intercrop on growth and yields of pineapple in a pineapple-pepper-cowpea based intercropping system was investigated in the rainy and late seasons of 2011 and 2012 at two locations in Akure, a humid rainforest zone of Nigeria. The experiments which were based on additive series of intercropping system were laid out in randomized complete block design with three replications. Experimental treatments were based on varying time (at 3 weeks intervals) of sowing cowpea into pineapple-pepper intercrop in addition to the sole crops of cowpea, pepper and pineapple. The pineapple growth indices were not influenced significantly by the intercropping. Relatively higher fruit yield was obtained with delayed cowpea introduction of cowpea into the pineapple-pepper intercrop. However, significantly lower pineapple fruit yield (12.8 t/ha) was obtained when cowpea was sown simultaneously at pepper transplanting while fruit yields declined between 70-73 % of sole pineapple and when cowpea was sown at 3, 6 and 9 WAT for the rainy season crop. The decline in fruit yields ranged between 18-39 % when cowpea was sown simultaneously with pepper for the late season crop.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 it