Biofertilizers: An Alternative for Sustainable Agriculture in the Amazon Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agricultural production plays a strategic role in Amazon, since it has economic and food-growing importance, but also represents a great highlight in the cultural and social scenarios. However, such theme still faces some challenges regarding the development of alternative methods capable of achieving sustainable productions, with quality and quantity, and yet with no harm to the natural resources. The Trichoderma fungus has become significant as a biological agent in agricultural species, presenting considerable answers to the development and protection of vegetables, and has also guaranteed the environmental preservation and food safety. Such issues considered, this study intends to guide small agricultural producers about the usage of Trichoderma fungi, emphasizing the agricultural species cultivation. The university extension program took place in four communities promoting workshops about the usage of the Trichoderma and other alternative biofertilizers. Each community was interviewed in an attempt to identify the main difficulties regarding a sustainable agricultural production. As a result, 75% of the communities still used chemicals in their fertilizing and plague control processes and did not use biological-origin products due to the lack of information on where to obtain them and how to use such items; only 25% had alternatives of biological defensives and merely 5% had any knowledge about the usage of biofertilizers like Trichoderma. Such findings evidence it is necessary to continue the extension program actions, focusing on their improvement and expansion, since they benefit society, economy and the environment of the Amazon region.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".