Participatory tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill) variety selection and evaluation for production in Eastern Amhara regional state
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A field experiment was conducted at Kobo and Mersa under irrigation with the objectives of evaluating the adaptability and yield potential of different tomato varieties and asses’ farmers’ perception. The experiment was laid out in Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications and used six released tomato varieties. The result showed that there was variation on yield and yield components of tomato varieties. The highest number of fruit clusters per plant (15.7) and marketable yield (45.8 tha-1) was recorded from variety Oval red whereas highest fruit per plant (70.5) and fruit length (5.9 cm) was recorded from variety Mersa. From the six tested tomato varieties Oval red was first ranked by its yield advantage from other tomato varieties and its shape has good market value by farmers’ selection. Variety Mersa was selected by farmer’s due to its disease resistance (powdery mildew) and good market value. Therefore, Oval Red and Mersa tomato varieties were recommended for Mersa and Kobo areas under irrigation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".