Comparison between growth performance in two silvopastoral systems comprising trees, short-lived perennial shrub, a forage, and livestock)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We aim to determine the growth performance of two 20-year-old silvopastoral systems comprising two timber trees, a palm tree), a short-lived perennial shrub, a forage and livestock; and to investigate fibre features and certain physical and mechanical properties of two timber trees (Myracrodruon urundeuva and Peltophorum dubium) in two plantation systems. The first system is called MP with two timber trees and the second one is called MPS with two timbers and a palm tree. The studied systems showed that it was possible to successfully combine fast-growing species, animals, forage and woody tree species, with a production cycle of more than 50 years of different goods and services (e.g., ornamentals, palm hearts, landscaping, fruits, seeds, bee pasture, meat, and wood). The height, diameter and volume for M. urundeuva trees in the MP system were greater than in the MPS system, whereas no difference between the systems was observed for P. dubium. By comparison, the growth and volume in P. dubium were greater than in M. urundeuva. For wood properties, it was shown that both systems can be used successfully, but the MPS system performed better than the MP system, in the aim of wood production of high mechanical strength and calorific value. In addition, the MPS intercropping system can yield more goods and services than the MP system, both systems bring returns with short-term (bean seed, forage, pasture), medium-term (forage, palm products, pasture, wood), and long-term (wood) financial returns.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".