MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943268060 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n6p407

Subdoses of Dicamba Herbicide on Yield Componentes in Function of the Soybean Growth Stage

2019· article· en· W2943268060 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Theodoro Schneider, Mauro Antônio Rizzardi, Ana Paula Rockenbach, Sabrina Tolotti Peruzzo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoybean genetics and cultivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDicambaRandomized block designCultivarAgronomyPhytotoxicityBiologyGlyphosateGrain yieldHorticultureYield (engineering)Weed controlPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soybean cultivars without tolerance can suffer injury from exposure to tank herbicide residues. This study aimed at assessing the potential effects of the broad spectrum herbicide dicamba on sensitive soybean during its vegetative and reproductive stages. The trial was performed in a randomized complete block design with four replications. Six rates (1.4, 2.8, 5.6, 11.2, 16.8 and 28.0 g ae ha-1) of dicamba were applied at two soybean growth stages (V3 and R2). The soybeans were planted in Passo Fundo, Rio Grande do Sul state in 2015/16 agricultural year. The dicamba induced symptoms of soybean phytotoxicity showed a steady rise at all the assessment times. The soybean decreased in height as the subdose of the herbicide increased. Dicamba was observed to negatively affect the number of nodes alone, during the V3 and R2 stages. The grain yield was adversely affected at the 28.0 g ae ha-1 subdose, in the V3 application stage, and in response to the 16.8 and 28.0 g ae ha-1 subdoses in the R2 stage.

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 score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicSoybean genetics and cultivationFrench-language works237,207