MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220883292 · doi:10.5539/jas.v14n4p126

Intercropping Sorghum and Soybean Efficiency Using Contour Ridges Technology in Southern Mali

2022· article· en· W4220883292 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cheick Oumar Dembele, Kalifa B. Traoré, Moussa Karembé, Birhanu Zemadin, Bouba Traoré, Fotigui Cisse, Oumar Samaké

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntercroppingSorghumAgronomyTillageYield (engineering)Biomass (ecology)MathematicsStrawEnvironmental scienceBiologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kani and Noumpinesso are two neighboring villages in which soil degradation is mainly caused by runoff and erosion. Contour ridges tillage (CRT) was identified as a runoff and erosion controlling technology while improving soil moisture and nutrient availability for crops. CRT technology associated with sorghum and soybean based intercropping system was assessed during 2017 and 2018 cropping season in an experiment under split plot design. Intercropping systems highly increased sorghum and soybean growth and yields. Sorghum grain yield, biomass yield, height and diameter were increased by 62, 51, 22 and 19%, respectively by intercropping. Soybean grain yield, biomass yield, height and diameter increased by 47, 30, 25 and 25%, respectively. Intercropping sorghum with soybean had an advantage with a Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) of 1.54 and 1.44 in 2017 and 2018 respectively. The technology of CRT added 40, 39, 25 and 21% on sorghum grain yield, straw yield, height and diameter respectively. The same parameters with soybean were greater by 52, 48, 38 and 35%, respectively. The application of CRT was economically profitable with a Value to Cost Ratio (VCR) of 3.3 and 3.0 in sorghum production and 12.8 and 9.2 in soybean production during 2017 and 2018 respectively.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsFrench-language works237,207