MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361212923 · doi:10.3390/su15075820

Combined Effects of Climate and Pests on Fig (Ficus carica L.) Yield in a Mediterranean Region: Implications for Sustainable Agricultural Strategies

2023· article· en· W4361212923 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Khalil Mellal, Rassim Khelifa, Abdelmadjid Chelli, Naima Djouadi, Khodir Madani

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPhytochemistry and biological activities of Ficus species
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaricaFicusAgricultureAgroforestryMediterranean climateClimate changeContext (archaeology)Yield (engineering)PEST analysisGeographyBiologyAgronomyEcologyHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fig cultivation has long been an agricultural tradition in the Mediterranean region, providing economic and social benefits to local communities. Understanding fig tree yield response to the rapid invasions of fig pests and shifts in climatic conditions is essential for developing appropriate sustainable agricultural strategies. In this context, we investigate whether rapid changes in climate and pest invasions have had a combined effect on fig (Ficus carica L.) tree yield. We used data collected over 10 years in Bejaïa province, Algeria, and conducted a regression analysis to investigate the relationship between fig tree yield and two key factors. Results revealed a significant warming trend (0.057 °C yr−1), and a decrease in precipitation (−27.1 mm yr−1), in the region. Multiple pests, including pathogenic fungi (Diaporthe cinerascens, Fusarium spp.) and ravaging bark beetles (Hypocryphalus scabricollis), have spread in the region. Fig tree yield declined by 25% during the study period and was affected by both factors. Our findings provide valuable insights that can aid farmers and practitioners in mitigating risks that arise from the combined effects of climate change and pest invasions, thereby promoting sustainable farming practices.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicPhytochemistry and biological activities of Ficus speciesFrench-language works237,207