MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022066178 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2020-0039

Survey of interseeded red clover management and perceived challenges by Ontario wheat growers

2020· article· en· W3022066178 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Cameron Ogilvie, C. Loucks, Heather Beach, P. Dewayne Johnson, Ralph C. Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsAgricultural Research Institute of OntarioUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRed CloverTillageWinter wheatAgronomyAgricultural scienceCropBiologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interseeding red clover (RC; Trifolium pratense L.) to winter wheat (WW; Triticum aestivum L.) is a recommended management practice for wheat growers in Ontario, as it is known to provide a host of services including a significant nitrogen credit for the subsequent crop. However, fewer Ontario wheat acres are being interseeded with RC because of challenges with nonuniform stands. A survey was developed to explore why growers use the winter wheat – red clover (WWrc) system and to evaluate the management practices being used. We received 179 responses, 142 which were from growers currently practicing WWrc and the rest were from growers who had used WWrc in the past. Of those who were currently practicing WWrc, increasing degrees of tillage, wider WW row spacing, and higher RC seeding rates showed some indication of improved RC stand uniformity, and qualitative feedback from growers in the survey supports this. It is recommended that these management practices receive formal evaluation to increase the success of the WWrc system in Ontario.

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 score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score0.820

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.151 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsFrench-language works237,207