MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560111822 · doi:10.5539/jas.v9n1p128

Determining Optimal Dose of Chemical Fertilizer on Biofortified Bean in Sud-Kivu Highlands

2016· article· en· W2560111822 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Casinga Mubasi Clérisse, Haminosi Ghislain, Cirimwami Legrand

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSowingFertilizerYield (engineering)CropChemistryPoint of deliveryAnimal scienceMathematicsHorticultureAgronomyBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Rational application of chemical fertilizer increases crop yield of biofortified bean. This study aimed at determining the optimal dose of chemical fertilizer to apply on two biofortified bean varieties used in the community in order to maximize their yield. Following a split-plot design, a field experiment was carried out on CODMLB001 and HM21-7 varieties, in Kashusha (Kabare territory) in Sud-Kivu Highlands, after a strategic application of increasing doses of chemical fertilizer NPK 17-17-17 (D<sub>0</sub>: Control; D<sub>1</sub>: 50 kg ha<sup>-1</sup>; D<sub>2</sub>: 75 kg ha<sup>-1</sup>; D<sub>3</sub>: 100 kg ha<sup>-1</sup>; D<sub>4</sub>: 125 kg ha<sup>-1</sup> and D<sub>5</sub>: 150 kg ha<sup>-1</sup>). The said doses were applied on the sowing day in a parallel gutter at 5cm from the sowing line. The germination rate, the number of days at both the flowering stage and the stage of physiological maturity, as well as the number of harvested crops and beans per plant, number of beans per pod, weight per 1000 grains and yield were observed. Positive and negative interaction between different increasing doses of chemical fertilizers regarding the two varieties were observed. This strategic application allows increased performance according to considered varieties and doses. For instance, the HM21-7 variety gave the best performance with the D<sub>5</sub> dose, while the CODMLB001 variety did better under <em>D<sub>2</sub></em>.</p>

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsFrench-language works237,207