Yield of Soybean in Different Systems of Pasture Replacement With and Without Soil Scarification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this work was to adjust the physical environment in sandy soils in no-tillage, to allow for the better development and yield of soybean, under water deficient conditions. The experiment was conducted at the Experimental Farm of The University of Western São Paulo in Presidente Bernardes, SP, 22º28'09'' S, 51º67'48'' W, 400 m asl. The experimental design constitued of two blocks each for the study variable: soil scarification, and no soil scarification. Each block was divided into 4 sub-blocks/treatments (control-natural seed bank of Urochloa brizantha-NSB; Urochloa brizantha broadcast seeding; Urochloa brizantha in line seeding; Urochloa brizantha in line seeding with soybean intercropped) with four replicates. As a plot, four systems of reimplantation of pasture with 4 kg ha-1 of Urochloa brizantha (Marandu cv.). Evaluated parameters: dry matter yield of pasture; yield components and soybean yield. The variables analyzed in each treatment were submitted to analysis of variance (p < 0.05) and as means were compared by the Tukey test (p < 0.05) using the Sisvar software. Considering the results obtained in the following research, it can be concluded that, according to the different pasture reimplatation systems, the treatment (in-line + soybean) contributed both to the increase of the dry matter of fodder, and to a yield of Soybean. Regarding the effect of soil scarification, none of the results were significantly influenced.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".