MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963210698 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n13p295

Furrow Irrigation for Corn Cultivation in Hydromorphic Soils

2019· article· en· W2963210698 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miguel Chaiben Neto, Adroaldo Dias Robaina, Márcia Xavier Peiter, Rafael Ziani Goulart, Elisa de Almeida Gollo, Jhosefe Bruning, Bruna Dalcin Pimenta, Silvana Antunes Rodrigues, Yesica Ramirez Flores, Vinicio Bordignon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIrrigation Practices and Water Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrrigationSoil waterEnvironmental scienceAgronomySurface irrigationDry matterLeaf area indexIrrigation managementCropBiologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of crop rotation in hydromorphic soils has been intensified in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Due to the difficult management of these soils, the use of irrigation is fundamental to increase the reliability of these production ecosystems. The present study aimed to evaluate the growth and yield components of corn under different managements of furrow irrigation. The study was conducted in Alegrete/RS in the experimental area of the Farroupilha Federal Institute during the 2017/2018 season. Two factors were evaluated: five managements of furrow irrigation, with a control (not irrigated) and 0, 25, 50 and 100% of the time required to replace the irrigation depth up to field capacity, and the influence of plant position relative to the total length of the furrow, at 0, 25 and 50 meters from its beginning. During the growth stage of corn, its LAI showed better performance for the three collections, at 34, 54 and 76 DAS, and plant height and shoot dry matter showed differences at 76 DAS in treatments that received irrigation. Yield components such as number of grains per ear, harvest index and grain yield were influenced by the use of irrigation, whereas water use efficiency did not differ between the use of irrigation and the control treatment. Lastly, best performances of application efficiency were found in treatments with 0% and 25% of the time required to replace the irrigation depth.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicIrrigation Practices and Water ManagementFrench-language works237,207