MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531666678 · doi:10.5539/jas.v8n11p154

Knowledge and Adoption of Conservation Agriculture Technologies by the Farming Community in Different Agro-Climatic Zones of Tamilnadu State in India

2016· article· en· W2531666678 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. R. Ramasubramaniyan, J. Vasanthakumar, B. S. Hansra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureConservation agricultureProductivityCrop rotationSustainabilityTillageBusinessAgroforestryNatural resourceTraditional knowledgeGreen RevolutionGeographyAgricultural economicsEconomic growthEconomicsEnvironmental scienceAgronomyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tamilnadu State in India is one of the earlier beneficiaries of Green Revolution which contributed to multifold increase in agricultural productivity. Though the State has been progressive, it has also experienced the ill effects of over exploitation of natural resources through intensive agriculture. There is an urgent need to shift its focus from over exploitative intensive farming to more sustainable farming with optimal use of resources without causing imbalances. Conservation Agriculture (CA) offers potential solution which not only enhances the productivity but also maintains the environmental safety and ecological sustainability. With this at the backdrop, the present study was conducted during 2013-2014 in all the seven agro-climatic zones of Tamilnadu State in India covering 350 respondents to understand the knowledge and adoption levels of Conservation Agriculture among the farming community in the State. Three Conservation agricultural technologies namely, Minimum Tillage, Crop Rotation and Permanent Soil Cover were identified. Knowledge of the farmers about these technologies and their adoption by the farmers were studied. As regards the awareness and knowledge level of respondents majority of them do not have knowledge on minimum tillage (72.6%) and permanent soil cover (75.1%) but a vast majority is knowledgeable on crop rotation (71.1%). Farmer characteristics such as age, educational status and innovativeness of farmers played a significant impact on the knowledge levels of CA whereas number of years of experience in farming and land holding pattern did not have significant influence on the knowledge levels of farmers on CA. Among the knowledgeable farmers only 11.5% of farmers adopted minimum tillage, 27.6% of farmers adopted permanent soil cover and 78% adopted crop rotation. None of the farmers adopted CA as a whole comprising all the three components.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAgricultural Innovations and PracticesFrench-language works237,207