Cropping system rotation in combination with harvest weed seed control for wild oat (<i>Avena fatua</i>) management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Wild oat is a significant weed of cropping systems in the Canadian Prairies. Wild oat resistance to herbicides has increased interest in the use of nonchemical management strategies. Harvest weed seed control techniques such as impact mills or chaff collection have been of interest in Prairie crops, with wild oat identified as a key target. To evaluate the effects of crop rotation maturity, harvest management, and harvest weed seed control on wild oat, a study was conducted from 2016 to 2018 at four locations in the Canadian Prairies. Two-year crop rotations with either early, normal, or late-maturing crops were implemented before barley was seeded across all rotations in the final year. In addition, a second factor of harvest management (swathing or straight cut) was included in the study. Chaff collection was used in this study to quantify wild oat seeds that were targetable by harvest weed seed control techniques. The hypothesis was that earlier maturing crops would result in increased wild oat capture at harvest and, therefore, lower wild oat populations. Wild oat density and wild oat biomass were lowest in the early maturing rotations. In addition, wild oat exhibited lower biomass in swathed crops than straight-cut crops. Wild oat seedbank levels reflected a similar trend with the lowest densities occurring in early maturing rotation, then the normal maturity rotation, and the late maturing rotation, which had the highest seedbank densities. Wild oat densities increased in all crop rotations; however, only harvest weed seed control and crop rotation were implemented as control measures. Wild oat numbers in the chaff were not reflective of the earliness of harvest. Crop yields suggest that competitive winter wheat stands contributed to the success of the early maturing rotations compared to other treatments. Early maturing rotations resulted in reduced wild oat populations, likely through a combination of crop competitiveness and rotational diversity, and harvest weed seed control management effects from earlier maturing crops.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".