Winter wheat (<i>Triticum aestivum</i>) response to flumioxazin soil residues from preceding dry bean (<i>Phaseolus vulgaris</i>) desiccation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nine field studies were conducted during 2011 to 2013 in Ontario to determine the effect of flumioxazin residues on winter wheat. For early- and mid-fall applied flumioxazin, there was no impact of the interval, 1, 2 or 4 weeks pre-plant (WPP), between flumioxazin application and winter wheat planting on injury, plant height, and yield. Injury was low, ranging from 0% to 4%, and was generally higher when flumioxazin was applied at 142.8 g ai ha−1 compared with 35.7 or 71.4 g ai ha−1. For late-fall applications, there was greater injury in the fall when flumioxazin was applied 2 WPP vs. 1 WPP. When combined over flumioxazin rates, winter wheat injury was 16% to 24% and 0% to 3% at 2 and 1 WPP, respectively. Injury increased when the rate increased from 35.7 to 142.8 g ai ha−1. Flumioxazin applied at 142.8 g ai ha−1 caused 1%, 5%, and 6% injury when applied 1 WPP and 32%, 53%, and 37% injury when applied 2 WPP at 1, 2, and 3 weeks after emergence in winter wheat, respectively. In all studies, flumioxazin applied at 35.7, 71.4 or 142.8 g ai ha−1 applied at various application timings caused no adverse effect on winter wheat height and yield.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".