MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109442980 · doi:10.17100/nevbiltek.767997

Hibrid Mısır Çeşitlerinin Koçan Özellikleri ve Tane Kalite Kriterleri

2020· article· tr· W3109442980 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leyla İdikut, Mehmet Ekinci, Cafer Gençoğlan

Bibliographic record

VenueNevşehir Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi · 2020
Typearticle
Languagetr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mısır bitkisinin yabancı tozlanan bir bitki olması, melez tohumluk üretiminde sürekliliği oluşturmaktadır. Sürekli yeni hibrid çeşitlerinin piyasaya arzı, bölge koşullarında denenmesini gerektirmektedir. Bu amaçla, Kahramanmaraş koşullarında 2016 yılı ikinci ürün sezonunda, Tavascan, Motri, Calgary, Sancia, P.573, P.32T83, Hydro, Performer, Capuzi, 72MAY80, Simon, Macha, PL 712, Torro, Bolsan, KB 5562, KB 3961 hibrid mısır çeşitleri kullanılarak koçan özellikleri ve tane kalite kriterleri araştırılmıştır. Araştırma 3 tekerrürlü olarak tesadüf blokları deneme desenine göre yürütülmüştür. Hibrid mısır çeşitlerinin koçan püskülü çıkış süresinin 52.0 - 59.0 gün, koçan yüksekliği 53.7 - 89.7 cm, uzunluğu 16.9 - 22.2 cm, koçan çapının 43.5-49.5 mm, koçanda sıra sayısının 14.5 - 16.9 adet, koçan sırasında tane sayısının 31.6 - 45.0 adet, koçan tane ağırlıkları 114.8 - 219.6 g, tane oranları % 84.1 -89.5, bin tane ağırlıkları 274.0 - 383.9 g, tanede protein oranı % 7.6-9.6, nişasta oranları % 65.5-69.6, yağ oranları % 2.4-3.5 arasında değiştiği tespit edilmiştir. Çeşitler arasında tüm incelenen özellikler yönünden 0.01 düzeyin istatistiksel önemli farklılığın olduğu kaydedilmiştir.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.016

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNevşehir Bilim ve Teknoloji DergisiSame topicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsFrench-language works237,207