MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2313828657 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2015-0261

Weed seed survival in experimental mini-silos of corn and alfalfa

2016· article· en· W2313828657 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Marie‐Josée Simard, Camille Lambert-Beaudet

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsSilageWeedAgronomyInformation siloBiologySilo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Weed seeds present in harvested silage have to survive silage fermentation and rumen digestion before they are dispersed as a contaminant of manure. Therefore, producing crops that are ensiled could lower the seed dispersal of weed escapes. This study is aimed at evaluating the viability of seven weed species after storage in experimental mini-silos filled with corn or alfalfa. Nylon mesh bags, each containing one hundred seeds of a weed species, were inserted at random locations in mini-silos filled with silage corn or alfalfa and stored for one, three or six months. The experiment included five mini-silos per storage time as well as untreated seeds. Water imbibition by intact seeds was also evaluated to determine if it could be related with survival in silage. After three and six months of storage few seeds were viable in any treatment (<0.1% of all seeds tested). Differences between weed species and silage type were observable after one month of storage and could not be related to seed coat permeability as measured by water imbibition. Ensiling for three to six months, or more, could be used to kill harvested weed seeds. Further evaluations in commercial farm silos could be done to support results.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant Science→Same topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology→French-language works237,207→