Balance design for robust foliar nutrient diagnosis of “Prata” banana (Musa spp.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The “Cavendish” and “Prata” subgroups represent respectively 47% and 24% of the world banana production. Compared to world average progressing from 10.6 to 20.6 t ha−1between 1961 and 2016, and despite sustained domestic demand and the introduction of new cultivars, banana yield in Brazil has stagnated around 14.5 t ha−1mainly due to nutrient and water mismanagement. “Prata” is now the dominant subgroup in N-E Brazil and is fertigated at high costs. Nutrient balances computed as isometric log-ratios (ilr) provide a comprehensive understanding of nutrient relationships in the diagnostic leaf at high yield level by combining raw concentration data. Although the most appropriate method for multivariate analysis of compositional balances may be less efficient due to non-normal data distribution and limited nutrient mobility in the plant, robustness of the nutrient balance approach could be improved using Box-Cox exponents assigned to raw foliar concentrations. Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy of nutrient balances to diagnose fertigated “Prata” orchards. The dataset comprised 609 observations on fruit yields and leaf tissue compositions collected from 2010 to 2016 in Ceará state, N-E Brazil. Raw nutrient concentration ranges were ineffective as diagnostic tool due to considerable overlapping of concentration ranges for low- and high-yielding subpopulations at cutoff yield of 40 Mg ha−1. Nutrient concentrations were combined into isometric log-ratios (ilr) and normalized by Box-Cox corrections between 0 and 1 which may also account for restricted nutrient transfer from leaf to fruit. Despite reducedilrskewness, Box-Cox coefficients did not improve model robustness measured as the accuracy of the Cate-Nelson partition between yield and the multivariate distance acrossilrvalues. Sensitivity was 94%, indicating that low yields are attributable primarily to nutrient imbalance. There were 148 false-positive specimens (high yield despite nutrient imbalance) likely due to suboptimal nutrition, contamination, or luxury consumption. The profitability of “Prata” orchards could be enhanced by rebalancing nutrients usingilrstandards with no need for Box-Cox correction.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".