MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2413547457 · doi:10.5539/jas.v8n7p129

Effect of Partial Root-Zone Drying Irrigation Technique (PRD) on the Total Dry Matter, Yield and Water Use Efficiency of Potato under Tunisian Semi-Arid Conditions

2016· article· en· W2413547457 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Béchir Ben Nouna, Mourad Rezig, Hassouna Bahrouni, Haroun Ben Ammar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIrrigation Practices and Water Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDry matterIrrigationWater-use efficiencyHorticultureMathematicsWater consumptionYield (engineering)Animal scienceChemistryAgronomyEnvironmental scienceBiologyPhysicsEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three field experiments were conducted in the plot of Technical Centre for Potato and Artichoke during three cropping season 2009, 2010 and 2011.The objective of this research is to evaluate the effect of the partial root-zone drying irrigation technique (PRD) on the dry matter, yield, water consumption and water use efficiency of potato (Spunta Variety). Four treatments were applied from the initiation of tuberisation stage to potato harvesting: FI treatment received 100% of Etc; PRD80, PRD70, and PRD60 treatments received respectively: 80, 70 and 60% of FI at each irrigation event and it was shifted between the two sides of the plants every 2 to 10 days. The highest water consumption was observed in FI as 336.5, 376, and 341.8 mm in the 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively, and the lowest was found in PRD60 as 280.4, 294.5, and 256.1 mm in the 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively. The maximum tuber yield was obtained from the FI as 25.6, 42.9 and 39.1 tha-1, in the 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively. There was no significant difference between FI and PRD60 with respect to tuber yields (LSD 5%).The highest water use efficiency (WUEY) was found in PRD60 as 13.4 kg m-3, in the second experiment (2010) and the lowest was found in PRD80 as 6.8 kg m-3 in the first experiment (2009). In the other hand, a linear relation between the accumulated total dry matter and the accumulated water consumption was able to be revealed.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicIrrigation Practices and Water ManagementFrench-language works237,207