MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080312307 · doi:10.5539/jas.v12n9p208

Post-Harvest Conservation of Green Maize in Different Packages

2020· article· en· W3080312307 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Victória Azevedo Monteiro, Francielly Rodrigues Gomes, Pedro Henrique Magalhães de Souza, Ricardo Carvalho Ribeiro, Cláudia Dayane Rodrigues Marques, Moab Acácio Barbosa, Givanildo Zildo da Silva, Angelita Lorrayne Soares Lima Ragagnin, Américo Nunes da Silveira-Neto, Simério Carlos Silva Cruz, Hildeu Ferreira da Assunção, Cláudio Hideo Martins da Costa, Danielle Fabíola Pereira da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural and Food Sciences
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsTitratable acidStrawAscorbic acidPostharvestHorticultureAgronomyMathematicsChemistryFood scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maize is the second most produced grain in Brazil, which has the potential to produce green maize, which is maize harvested before physiological maturation. Aimed with this work evaluate three packages for postharvest conservation of green maize at room temperature in the conditions of the Brazilian cerrado. The double hybrid AG-1051 were planted. After the cobs were harvested, they were submitted to three treatments, each treatment with three repetitions and each repetition contained 4 cobs. The analyzes carried out were: fresh weight loss, instrumental coloring, titratable acidity content, ascorbic acid content and soluble solids. The results were submitted to the 5% Tukey test and regression. The treatment with polyethylene stood out for the loss of fresh mass, color of the maize cobs as for the levels of titratable acidity, presenting the best results and, for the same parameters, the maize cobs of the treatment with straw showed the lowest results, showing that the conservation straw cobs is the least suitable treatment. As for the content of ascorbic acid and soluble solids, the results showed no statistical difference for any of the treatments showing that they kept the contents unchanged during storage.

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)0.000
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 score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAgricultural and Food SciencesFrench-language works237,207