Nutritional Requirement of Sugarcane Cultivars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sugarcane produces a large amount of biomass, extracts and accumulates high amounts of nutrients. In the literature the nutritional requirements for most cultivated varieties in the past are found, however there is little information on the new varieties currently planted. The objective of this study was to evaluate the nutritional requirement of four sugarcane varieties, currently very planted, in the cycles of plant-cane, first and second ratoon. The study was installed in a Yellow Oxisol. The experimental design was a randomized block design, with five replications, and four treatments: RB867515, RB92579, SP813250 and VAT90212. During maturation of the cane, in the three evaluation cycles, the productivity of natural biomass and the nutritional requirement of macronutrients of the varieties were determined. It was evidenced that the cultivars of sugarcane are of high productive potential and resemble the accumulation of biomass, observing a yield of 158, 128 and 107 t ha-1 in the cycles of plant-cane, first and second ratoon. Regarding the nutritional requirement, the varieties did not differ among them and expressed the following order of need in the plant-cane K > N > Ca > Mg > S > P, in the first and second ratoon, the sequence observed was K > N > Ca > S > Mg > 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".