Maize (Zea mays) Cultivated in Concrectionary Petric Plinthosol
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil with ironstone concretions, despite presenting disadvantages from the agronomic point of view, don’t restrain its use in agriculture, livestock or forestry. However, more deeply and clear information about the behavior of crops of agricultural interest cultivated in this type of soil is absent. Due to the observation of agricultural stands with crops in this type of soil, the hypothesis that plinthite ironstone concretions in the soil interfered negatively in the development, at least in early stages, on crops of agro-economic interest. The objective was to verify the growth and development of maize (Zea mays) cultivated in soil with the presence of plinthite ironstone concretions and in the absence of them. Concretionary Petric Plinthosol were collected in the 0-0.20 m layer and part of the soil was sieved so that concretions larger than 3.10 mm in diameter were removed, thus leaving two treatments, soil with and without plinthite ironstone concretions. The experiment was then carried out and morphological and gas exchange evaluations were performed during their phenological phase. Maize grown in soil without ironstone concretions showed higher growth when compared to maize grown in soil with ironstone concretions, as well variation on gas exchange evaluation and leaf chlorophyll index. There were differences in the root and total dry matter values with more expressive value of the crops cultivated in soil without ironstone concretions. Therefore, it is concluded that plinthite ironstone concretions interfere in the development and growth of maize crop.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it