MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922489403 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n4p449

Oil Yield of Sunflower Cultivated With Different Water Depths and Nitrogen Doses

2019· article· en· W2922489403 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jonas de Oliveira Freire, Marcelo Tavares Gurgel, José Francismar de Medeiros, Kaline Dantas Travassos, Neyton de Oliveira Miranda, Rafael Oliveira Batista

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSunflower and Safflower Cultivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsNitrogenSunflowerIrrigationRandomized block designAgronomyEnvironmental scienceFactorial experimentEvapotranspirationTukey's range testYield (engineering)InteractionAnimal scienceMathematicsChemistryBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sunflower is adapted to different soil and climate conditions, but its water and nitrogen requirements are not well defined. This study was carried out in Apodi, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil, to evaluate the oil yield of sunflower in response to irrigation depth and nitrogen dose. A randomized block experimental design was used with a factorial scheme with four replications. The factors tested were irrigation depths corresponding to 58, 80, 100 and 120% of crop evapotranspiration (water-use efficiency variable), and nitrogen doses corresponding to 40, 100, 200 and 370% of the standard dose. Data were submitted to analysis of variance by the F-test, followed by the Tukey test of means and regression analysis. The increase in the water depth until 100% ETc and in the nitrogen dose until 260 kg ha-1 promoted increase in the values of all variables, but at higher nitrogen doses the variables decreased. The response surfaces showed stronger response to nitrogen dose for the water depths around 100% ETc and for the lower nitrogen doses, and greater water use efficiency for the production of oil for the water depths around 100% ETc, independently of nitrogen dose.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicSunflower and Safflower CultivationFrench-language works237,207