Influence of Groundnut Populations on Weed Suppression in Cassava-Groundnut Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Cassava was grown in sole cropping and intercropping with groundnut to determine the performance of associated crops and weed control at three different groundnut populations in southern Guinea ecology of Nigeria. The experiment consisted of three planting arrangements: 1 row of cassava:3 rows of groundnut, 1 row of cassava:2 rows of groundnut, and 1 row of cassava:1 row of groundnut, sole groundnut at the three planting populations and sole cassava. The groundnut treatments suppressed weeds considerably when compared to sole cassava. This resulted from the vegetative production of groundnut which increased up to 8 weeks after planting (WAP) in 2001 and 12 WAP in 2002. More vegetative growth in 2002 led to lower groundnut yield. Intercropping significantly (p &lt; 0.05) reduced leaf area of cassava, groundnut and cassava yields. Cassava/groundnut system reduced cassava yields by 26 to 74% in 2001 and by 15 to 19% in 2002. The LER values were greater than 1.0 but cassava intercropped with groundnut population of 40,000 plants/ha has a value of 1.89, which was highest. This offers a good weed control as well as the best crop yield advantage. Therefore, groundnut population of 40,000 plants/ha was most ideal population for cassava/groundnut intercrop.</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 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".