Inter-row stubble seeding and plant growth regulators to improve field pea standability and production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field pea (Pisum sativum) is an important economic and rotational crop in Alberta, Canada; however, standability problems are a major barrier to increasing seeded area in highly productive growing environments. Field experiments were conducted from 2015 to 2017 at three sites in the central and Peace regions of Alberta to determine if (i) pea standability and production can be improved using inter-row seeding into untilled standing wheat stubble; (ii) pea standability and production can be improved using chlormequat chloride (CCC), trinexapac-ethyl (TXP), or ethephon (ETH) plant growth regulators (PGRs); and (iii) PGR responses are cultivar-specific. Depending on the site–year, there were 16–17 inter-row seeding, PGR, and cultivar treatment combinations arranged in a randomized complete block design. Relative to the no-stubble control, inter-row seeding into 20- or 30-cm-tall, untilled wheat stubble significantly improved standability between 6% and 23% under conditions when lodging occurred. It also reduced days to maturity and increased 1000-seed weight, but had no effect on yield. Individual PGR treatments (CCC, TXP, and ETH) generally had small and inconsistent impacts on agronomic traits, yield, and seed quality. In dry conditions, PGRs reduced yield. CDC Meadow was slightly more responsive to PGR treatments than AAC Lacombe, indicating responses may be cultivar-specific. Because of the small and inconsistent responses, PGRs have little value as an agronomic tool in field pea. Alternatively, inter-row seeding into standing wheat stubble is a low-cost, easy to implement practice for improving field pea standability.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".