MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588272073 · doi:10.5539/jas.v9n3p233

Nutrients Use Efficiency and Uptake Characteristics of Panicum virgatum for Fodder Production

2017· article· en· W2588272073 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kyriakos D. Giannoulis, Dimitrios Bartzialis, Elpiniki Skoufogianni, N.G. Danalatos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanicum virgatumAgronomyFodderNutrientPanicumIrrigationPerennial plantEnvironmental scienceBiomass (ecology)BiologyBioenergyEcologyBiofuel

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Panicum virgatum could produce cattle feed with lower costs due to the low input requirements and its perennial nature. Dry biomass yield vs. N-P-K nutrient uptake relations as well as the N-mineralization and the N-fertilization recovery fraction for Panicum virgatum (cv. Alamo) were determined under field conditions for four N-fertilization (0, 80, 160 and 240 kg ha-1) and two irrigation levels (0 and 250 mm), οn two soils in central Greece with rather different moisture status. It was found that the dry fodder yield on the aquic soil may reach 14 t ha-1 using supplemental irrigation; while on the xeric soil a lower yield of 9-10 t ha-1 may be produced only under supplemental irrigation. Moreover, the average N, P and K concentration was 1.3%, 0.14% and 1.3% in leaves, and 0.5%, 0.85%, and 1.5% in stems, respectively, showing the very low crop requirements. Furthermore, linear biomass yield-nutrient uptake relationships were found with high R2, pointing to nutrient use efficiency of 132 and 75 kg kg-1, for N and K respectively. The base N-uptake ranged from 71-74 kg ha-1 on the aquic to 60 kg ha-1 or less on the xeric soil. Finally, it was found that N-recovery fraction was 20% on the aquic soil and lower on the xeric. Therefore, it could be conclude that Panicum virgatum seems to be a very promising crop for fodder production and its introduction in land use systems (especially οn aquic soils of similar environments) should be taken into consideration.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicBioenergy crop production and managementFrench-language works237,207