Assessment of Agro-morphological Parameters of Two Accessions of Undergrowth Yam (Dioscorea sp.) Cultivated in the Inter-rows of Mature Rubber Trees (Hevea brasiliensis) in Daloa, Côte d’Ivoire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The valorization of mature rubber tree inter-rows by food crops could solve the problem of food insecurity in rubber tree-growing areas. This study aims to assess the agro-morphological parameters of understory yams sown under mature rubber trees. To this end, a trial was carried out in Daloa on a mature rubber tree plantation and a control plot of sole yam. Two accessions of undergrowth yams, “Bacoué” and “Soupkataloa”, were grown in the rubber tree inter-rows and monoculture. The experimental design was a completely randomized block with 15 repetitions. The parameters measured on the yams were emergence rate, specific leaf area (SLA), number of days to emergence, number of days to first leaf, stem height (Ht), crown diameter (CD) and production. The results showed that the accessions tested under rubber trees emerged relatively well, with 66.67% and 70.83% rates for Bacoué and Soupkataloa, respectively. These combined accessions also showed the largest SLAs of 343 cm2/g for Bacoué and 328.5 cm2/g for Soupkataloa during the dry season. However, emergence was late under the rubber trees compared with the yam monoculture. Bacoué emerged 179.19 d after sowing and had its first leaves 42.88 d later, whereas these values were 58.18 d and 11.71 d respectively for Soupkataloa. However, although Bacoué performed better, with an Ht of 825 cm in 70 days and a large CD (11.18 mm), its production was identical to that of Soupkataloa. These results show that undergrowth yams can be combined with mature rubber trees to guarantee food security.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".