MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418792195 · doi:10.21273/hortsci.36.7.1224

Brown Bead of Broccoli. I. Response of the Physiological Disorder to Management Practices

2001· article· en· W2418792195 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sylvie Jenni, Pierre Dutilleul, Stephen H Yamasaki, Nicolas Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueHortScience · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGrowth and nutrition in plants
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalMcGill UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSowingBeadHuman fertilizationBrassica oleraceaCropGrowing seasonAgronomyHorticultureChemistryBiologyGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate whether brown bead can be reduced by various cultural practices, a 3-year field study was conducted on a 600-acre broccoli ( Brassica oleracea L., Italica group) farm in southwestern Quebec. Factors studied included N fertilization, soil series, previous crop, season of bed forming, or planting method. Four N treatments were randomly applied to two blocks in 41 fields of `Everest' broccoli: 85-0-0, 85-54-0, 85-54-54, and 85-54-108; the first number indicating N (kg·ha -1 ) applied before planting; the second, N applied 5 weeks after planting; and the last, N applied 7 weeks after planting. Over the 3-year study, brown bead affected 11% of the broccoli heads and accounted for one-third of the rejects. Brown bead severity on individual heads was described on a 0-8 scale. Plots with greater N applications (i.e., 85-54-54, 85-54-108) had significantly ( P < 0.001) lower proportions of plants with brown bead compared with plots with lower N applications. Brown bead incidence reacted similarly from year to year to N fertilization and soil type. However, fertilization interacted with soil type. The less N was applied, the more soil effect was important. Soil effect was maximum at a low N level (85-0-0) with 2.5 times more plants showing brown bead in the Saint Blaise series than in the Sainte Rosalie series. Bed type, previous crop, or planting type did not affect the incidence of brown bead.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHortScienceSame topicGrowth and nutrition in plantsFrench-language works237,207