Period of Weed Interference in Bean With Nitrogen Fertilizer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The competition between weeds and bean plants, mainly by nutrients of the environment, is one of the main causes of low crop yield. Therefore, the objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of nitrogen fertilization on the extension of the period prior to interference (PPI) in common beans, cultivar TAA GOL. Sowing was performed in conventional system. The treatments were divided into two groups: cover nitrogen fertilization (200 kg urea ha-1) and no cover fertilization. Within each area, we established periods of cohabitation of the crop with weeds from the emergence up to seven times of its life cycle (0-10, 0-20, 0-30, 0-40, 0-50, 0-60, 0-70 days) and a control. The experiment design was randomized blocks with three replicates. Digitaria spp. presented a greater relative importance in both areas, followed by Eleusine indica. The period prior to weed interference (PPI) in the area with nitrogen fertilization occurred up to 46 days after emergence (DAE), and only up to 3 DAE for the area without cover fertilization. There was a 30% decrease in bean productivity by comparing the area with nitrogen fertilization (2,004.79 kg ha-1) and the area without nitrogen fertilization (1,412.43 kg ha-1). Therefore, nitrogen fertilization increased crop yield and favored it competitively in relation to weeds by increasing the weed PPI.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".