Sowing Dates and Soybean Cultivars Influence Seed Yield, Oil and Protein Contents in Subtropical Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sowing date is the crop management practice with higher interference on soybean grain yield, although this interference is dependent on the genotype by environment interaction. This study was carried out to evaluate how soybean genotypes behave at different sowing times in a subtropical environment. We evaluated the grain yield, yield components, plant morphology and grain oil and protein content of four soybean cultivars (FPS Urano RR, BMX Apolo RR, BMX Energia RR and BRS 284) at three sowing dates (early, mid, and late sowing in 2010/2011 season) in Mid-South of Parana State, Brazil. Early cultivars at late sowing may have problems with mechanical harvest. The number of pods and grains differed among cultivars, and the cultivar “BRS 284” showed the best results. As an exception, the cultivar “BRS 284” showed yield stability among sowing dates. Higher amount of grain protein content occurs in middle and late sowing dates. The grain yield decreased with delay of sowing due to the reduction of the grains mass and in Southern Brazil is very important to assure high mass of seed to obtain high grain yields.
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) | 0.000 | 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".