MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962746393 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2018-0317

Agronomic practices for red lentil in Alberta

2019· article· en· W2962746393 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
R. Bowness, Mark A. Olson, D. Pauly, Ross H. McKenzie, Casey W. Hoy, K. S. Gill, E. Bremer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsCentre de réadaptation Lethbridge-Layton-MackaySheridan CollegeAlberta Ministry of Agriculture and ForestryAgriculture Food and Rural Development
FundersAlberta Pulse Growers CommissionAlberta Crop Industry Development Fund
KeywordsCultivarAgronomyYield (engineering)ProductivityFertilizerBiologyRhizobiaSeedingAgricultureEcologyNitrogen fixation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lentil was seldom grown in Alberta prior to 2015 due to the lack of demonstrated ability to achieve adequate yields, even though it was potentially well adapted to most agricultural regions within the province. We conducted field trials at five locations for 4 yr to determine potential productivity and optimum seeding rate, N management, and imidazolinone herbicide formulation for two imidazolinone-resistant red lentil cultivars across a broad geographic region in Alberta. Over the 4 yr of this study (2012–2015), the average yield potential of lentil ranged from 3000 to 3700 kg ha−1 at five locations. Maximum yield was consistently obtained when plant density exceeded 90 plants m−2. Lentil yield was not influenced by rhizobia inoculation, N fertilizer rate, or their interaction. Application of imidazolinone-based herbicide did not impact yield or nodulation of the lentil cultivars used in this study. High productivity of two imidazolinone-resistant red lentil cultivars was attainable over a broad geographic region in Alberta.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.217
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisFrench-language works237,207