Nitrogen fertilization for young established hybrid hazelnuts in the Upper Midwest of the United States of America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Braun, L. C., Gillman, J. H., Hoover, E. E. and Russelle, M. P. 2011. Nitrogen fertilization for young established hybrid hazelnuts in the Upper Midwest of the USA. Can. J. Plant Sci. 91: 907–918. Hybrids of Corylus avellana, C. americana and C. cornuta are proposed as a new crop for the Upper Midwest. Anecdotal information from midwestern growers suggests that these hybrid hazelnuts have high N requirements, but this has not been confirmed in replicated trials. Current nitrogen (N) recommendations for hazelnut production are based on research from the Pacific Northwest and may not be applicable to these hybrids in the Upper Midwest due to differing soils, climate, genetics, and growing systems. Three years of N rate trials on four plantings, that were 3 to 6 yr old at the start, showed that N responses of hybrid hazelnuts fit patterns for other woody crops: no N responses were found on soils with high organic matter, nor on soils with suspected P or K deficiencies. Where N responses were observed, they suggested that the N requirements of hybrid hazelnuts in the Upper Midwest are relatively low compared with those of European hazelnuts in the Pacific Northwest. Leaf N concentrations were within the expected ranges established for European hazelnuts in Oregon, suggesting that Oregon's standards may be applied to hybrid hazelnuts, except that 2.2% leaf N should be considered adequate, rather than a threshold to sufficiency.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".