Drought Tolerant Varieties of Common Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) in Central Afghanistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Legume crops have played a significant role in the historical dietary regime of Afghan peoples. Recently, production of common beans has increased on Afghan farms relative to other leguminous crops. However, compared with other pulse crops, common beans are more prone to water stress. To select drought resistant common beans, several varieties were assessed in the field during a sequence of restricted water supplies for two years and the local drought regime was analyzed for a 12-years period. The first experiment in 2018 compared five bean varieties under four irrigation regimes. White and black beans with long maturation periods and climber habits, and motley beans, characterized by moderate maturity and semi-climber structures, were susceptible to drought and did not mature well under restricted irrigation and ambient climate conditions. The other two varieties, red and pied beans, adapted to restricted water supplies and the long dry summers; these two varieties were assessed again in 2019. Statistical analyses and inferences based on the 2019 study suggest that red beans are more adaptable to water deficit treatments compared to pied beans. Therefore, red beans are considered a better option given the frequent mid- to late-summer droughts that occur in this region, together with the generally harsh mountain climate and short growing season of the central Afghanistan highlands. As a second varietal choice, pied beans are reasonably drought tolerant based on our findings.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".