AGRONOMIC COMPARISON OF THREE SOYBEAN VARIETIES (GLYCINE MAX) SUBJECTED TO ORGANIC TREATMENT WITH COW DOG IN BUHIMBA (NORTH KIVU, DR CONGO)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three improved varieties of soya (glycine max) subjected to an organic treatment based on cow dung were studied in buhimba in north kivu. The experimental design adopted was that of completely randomised blocks (crb) with 3 replications. The aim was to assess the yields of three soya varieties under the ecological conditions of buhimba. After applying 10t/ha of cow dung on the experimental site, the yields obtained were 7.727 t/ha ± 2.866 for the canada variety, 8.7 t/ha ± 2.107 for the sb24 variety and 6.983 t/ha ± 1.675 for the imperial variety considered as a control. After statistical analysis using a single-factor anova, comparison of the means at the 5% threshold revealed that there was no difference between the above yield averages. On the one hand, the soil in the study area, consisting of andosols, would be influenced by the application of cow dung, which would in turn have a positive effect on improving ph. Furthermore, the genetic make-up of these three varieties would have had some influence on their respective yields under similar conditions
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".