MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888498311 · doi:10.3390/agronomy8090164

Corn Forage Yield and Quality for Silage in Short Growing Season Areas of the Canadian Prairies

2018· article· en· W2888498311 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jessie Guyader, V. S. Baron, K. A. Beauchemin

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaBeef Cattle Research Council
KeywordsSilageNeutral Detergent FiberAgronomyHybridNutrientDry matterForageStarchGrowing seasonStoverBiomass (ecology)BiologyAnimal scienceCropFood scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of short-season hybrids has made corn (Zea mays L.) silage (CS) production possible in cooler areas. This work aimed at determining biomass yield and nutritive quality of short-season corn CS hybrids. Six corn hybrids were grown in three years at four locations within the Canadian prairies with four field replications. Hybrids were harvested before occurrence of frost at a target dry matter (DM) content of 300 to 400 g kg−1. Corn heat units (CHU) from seeding to harvesting (CHUseed-harv) and water supply were recorded. Samples were analysed for nutrient content; i.e., DM, neutral detergent fiber (NDF), crude protein (CP), starch, and in vitro DM and NDF digestibilities (48 h incubation). Then, CHUseed-harv, water supply, whole plant DM, CHU rating of the hybrid, and cob percentage were assessed as predictors of nutrient content. Location, hybrid, and year affected nutrient composition and yield. Overall, CP and NDF were positively correlated (r = 0.48, p < 0.01), but both were negatively correlated with DM yield (r = −0.63, −0.28, p < 0.01) and starch (both r = 0.71, p < 0.01). Within and among locations, CHUseed-harv differently affected nutrient composition and DM yield. However, DM yield was the most predictable factor (R2 = 0.86) with CHUseed-harv being the strongest contributor (48%) to the overall variability, followed by water supply (23%). Whole plant DM and CHUseed-harv were also good predictors of starch (R2 = 0.54). This work showed the high variability of biomass yield and nutritive quality of short-season CS hybrids grown in Northern areas.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations93
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomySame topicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207