Potential Corn Yield Losses from Weeds in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crop losses from weed interference have a significant effect on net returns for producers. Herein, potential corn yield loss because of weed interference across the primary corn-producing regions of the United States and Canada are documented. Yield-loss estimates were determined from comparative, quantitative observations of corn yields between nontreated and treatments providing greater than 95% weed control in studies conducted from 2007 to 2013. Researchers from each state and province provided data from replicated, small-plot studies from at least 3 and up to 10 individual comparisons per year, which were then averaged within a year, and then averaged over the seven years. The resulting percent yield-loss values were used to determine potential total corn yield loss in t ha−1 and bu acre−1 based on average corn yield for each state or province, as well as corn commodity price for each year as summarized by USDA-NASS (2014) and Statistics Canada (2015). Averaged across the seven years, weed interference in corn in the United States and Canada caused an average of 50% yield loss, which equates to a loss of 148 million tonnes of corn valued at over U.S.$26.7 billion annually.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".