MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955975459 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n10p264

Do Weeds From Seeds or Regrowth in Coexistence Periods Alter Biochemical and Yield Characteristics of Soybeans?

2019· article· en· W2955975459 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ana Paula Rockenbach, Mauro Antônio Rizzardi, Adriana Favaretto, Theodoro Schneider, Andréa Michel Sobottka

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGrowth and nutrition in plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsBiologyYield (engineering)AgronomyAgricultureEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to evaluate changes in soybean secondary metabolism and soybean yield components when subjected to coexistence periods with volunteer corn and established horseweed (Conyza spp.) regrowth. Two field experiments were conducted in the agricultural years 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 at Passo Fundo University, Passo Fundo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Experiment I was conducted in the agricultural year 2015/2016 in order to establish periods of coexistence between soybean and corn. The treatments consisted of two soybean densities in the main plots (175,000 and 350,000 plants ha-1) and different periods of coexistence between soybean and corn in the subplots. Experiment II was conducted in the agricultural year of 2016/2017 in order to investigate the interference of regrowth horseweed during coexistence periods with soybean. The total phenols, flavonoids, saponins, soybean yield components and seed yields were evaluated. Volunteer corn that initiates growth after the V4 soybean stage and horseweed regrowth during cultivation do not adversely affect secondary metabolism, seed yield or soybean yield components.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicGrowth and nutrition in plantsFrench-language works237,207