673 A Synthesis of Worldwide Approaches for Rationalizing Nitrogen Fertilization of Vegetable Crops
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The necessity of achieving appropriate nitrogen fertilization of vegetable crops relates to both economical and environmental sustainability. Split nitrogen applications have been shown to improve N-use efficiency, in line with the aforementioned objective and should therefore be encouraged. Given the variation in the amount of N naturally provided to, or uptaken by, the crop, strategies are required to tailor supplementary fertilization to actual crop needs, keeping in mind the absolute requirement for optimal yield in quality and quantity. It is suggested that the fertilization rates applied at sowing or later in the season can be figured in two manners. The first relies on modelling; the second on measurements. The modelling (N budget) approach, mostly linked to initiatives on the European continent, would be most applicable to the determination of the first fertilizer dressing. When a plant stand is established, however, canopy-based measurements made either directly or remotely could be developed to make use of the capability of the plants to integrate the properties of the soil environment and to decide upon further top-dressed applications. For this purpose, a fully fertilized “reference plot” has to be introduced in the field in order to overcome the variability induced by season, site and cultivar. With the emergence of “precision farming” and “remote sensing technologies” it is now possible to adjust fertilizer inputs not only at the field level but also within fields based on actual, localized requirements.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".