Agronomic Preliminary Performance of Two Radish Cultivars Intercropped With Coriander
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Characterised as a traditional technique for the production of food and biomass, intercropping is a practice mainly used by small rural producers. In general, the practice has sought to maximise the use of environmental resources in an area, as well as to promote the ecological balance of different ecosystems. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of radish intercropped with coriander in a region of semi-arid climate. The experimental design was of randomised complete blocks, with five replications per treatment: 1) ‘Cometo’ radish intercropped with coriander, 2) monocropped ‘Cometo’ radish, 3) ‘Saxa’ radish intercropped with coriander, 4) monocropped ‘Saxa’ radish, and 5) monocropped coriander. The coriander and/or radish plants from each treatment were harvested 30 days after sowing. The following parameters were evaluated in the radish: number of leaves per plant, fresh shoot weight, shoot length, taproot length, taproot diameter, taproot weight and productivity; while in the coriander the following were evaluated: number of stems per plant, fresh shoot weight, shoot length and productivity. The Area Equivalence Efficiency (AEE) was also evaluated for the main crop. The ‘Saxa’ radish showed the highest productivity, both as a single crop and when intercropped (15.40 and 14.32 t ha-1 of root, respectively). AEE values were greater than 1 in both intercrops, 2.13 and 1.70 for the intercropped ‘Cometo’ and ‘Saxa’ radish respectively, showing this cropping system to be an important way of optimising coriander cultivation in the area of study.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".