Weed Suppression by Cover Plants in the Amazonian
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The productivity of citrus plants has not reached its maximum potential due to the action of several factors that directly affect agricultural profitability. Among these factors, weed interference has a great importance since it causes a reduction in crop productivity. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of different cover crops on suppression of weeds in an orange orchard. The research was conducted in a commercial orange production area located in Rio Preto da Eva, AM, Brazil. The experimental design was a randomized block design with six treatments and four replications. Treatments were control, millet, jack bean, forage turnip, brachiaria, millet + jack bean. The evaluated characteristics were weed density, soil cover percentage, total weed dry matter, total cover plant dry matter and growth indices (leaf area index, leaf area ratio, and specific leaf area). Cover plants provided a good dry matter production and had a suppressive effect on weed growth, except for forage turnip. Brachiaria and jack bean presented the highest values of leaf area index and leaf area ratio.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".