MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2960287022 · doi:10.2134/cftm2018.12.0103

Evaluation of Methods of Pasture Rejuvenation for Improved Forage Production

2019· article· en· W2960287022 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrop Forage & Turfgrass Management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRuminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanCanadian Association for the Study of the Liver
FundersAlberta Beef Producers
KeywordsForageAgronomyPastureFertilizerEnvironmental scienceDry matterGrazingBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Core Ideas Methods to improving depleted forage stand by seeding, weed control, fertilizer application, and aeration were investigated. A combination of vegetation control + direct seeding improved forage yield, crude protein, and total digestible nutrients. A 2-year combined forage yield for four methods increased profit from forage production. A 3-year on-farm study was conducted in northwestern Alberta to determine the effects of several pasture rejuvenation methods such as breaking and reseeding, spraying to control weeds and brush, forage-seeding methods, fertilizer application, pasture rest, and aeration/spiking on forage dry matter (DM) yield, botanical composition, and forage quality. Three years after methods were implemented, the pasture rejuvenation methods investigated significantly affected (P < 0.05) forage DM yield; forage botanical composition; forage Ca, P, Ca:P ratio, K, Mg, and Cu; revenue generated for forage production; and marginal returns. Rejuvenation methods did not affect (P > 0.05) forage C:P ratio, S, Na, Fe, Zn, Mn, and total digestible nutrients. Spring herbicide application + direct seeding (RSS), fertilizer application (FERT), and fall herbicide application + broadcast seed in spring (RFBSS) improved forage production and some forage quality parameters more than other methods over control. Legume composition in the total forage production was as much as 29% for RSS compared with 2–17% for other methods including the control. For a 2-year combined forage DM yield after methods were implemented, total forage DM yield, revenue generated, and marginal returns for forage production as well as profit over control were significantly greater (P < 0.05) for RSS than other pasture rejuvenation methods investigated. The study demonstrated that RSS improved forage DM yield and some quality parameters (particularly crude protein, Ca, and Ca:P). Also, RSS increased both revenue and profit over most methods including control. Results suggest RSS can be recommended as an effective method or option of improving the forage productivity of depleted pastures.

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.283 · 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