MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414830997 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaf300.548

PSV-24 Forage yield, land equivalent ratio of cereals and pea-cereal intercrops differing in pea to cereal ratio at two sites in western Canada.

2025· article· en· W4414830997 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daalkhaijav Damiran, Bill Biligetu, Kathy Larson, Hari P. Poudel, H.A. Lardner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriticaleMonocultureSeedingForageSativumHordeum vulgareSecaleSorghum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Intercrops of pea (Pisum sativum L.; cv. CDC Jasper) with wheat (Triticum aestivum L.; cv. 15FOR36), barley (Hordeum vulgare L.; cv. CDC Renegade), triticale (Triticosecale Wittmack; cv. Taza) and rye (Secale cereale L. cv. KWS Bono) (binary crops) and their equally composited mixture (poly crops; 12.5% or 18.75% each cereal) in two pea: cereal seeding ratios (25:75 and 50:50) were compared with monocrops of pea and cereals in summer 2024. The experiment was conducted at the Lethbridge Research and Development Centre at Lethbridge, AB, Canada and at the Goodale Farm University of Saskatchewan at Saskatoon, SK, Canada. Monoculture seeding rates were 135, 123, 90, 163, and 129 kg/ha for wheat, barley, rye, triticale, and pea, respectively. The intercrop seeding ratio was calculated as a percentage of full seeding rate of individual monocrop. The experimental design was a RCBD with replicated (n = 4) 15 treatments (5 monocrops, 8 binary crops, and 2 poly crops). Plot size was 6×1.8 m, and plots were seeded at 3.75 cm depth (on 11 and 15 June for Lethbridge and Saskatoon, respectively) at row spacing of 30 cm and harvested on 9 and 30 August for Saskatoon and Lethbridge, respectively. Forage yield (DMY), land equivalent ratio (LER), and competitive ratio (CR) were determined. The DMY ranged from 2.3 to 6.6 t/ha at Saskatoon and 3.2 to 11.2 t/ha at Lethbridge. Pea was similar (P > 0.05) with rye but was lower (P < 0.05) than wheat, barley, and triticale monocrops in DMY. The cereal monocrops, excluding rye, had comparable (P > 0.05) DMY within the two sites (6.0 ± 0.7 and 10.9 ± 1.2 t/ha for Saskatoon and Lethbridge, respectively). The rye monocrop and intercrop with pea yielded lower (P < 0.05) than other cereal monocrops and their respective intercrops at both sites. The DMY of pea and –wheat, –barley, –triticale intercrops were not different (P > 0.05); 5.5 ± 1.0 and 10.2 ± 2.1 t/ha for Saskatoon and Lethbridge, respectively. Cereals were dominant in the pea–cereal 50:50 intercrops accounting for 55–93% of DMY. The intercrops did not vary (P > 0.05) in DMY due to seeding ratios. However, the contribution of pea in combined DMY of intercrops was greater (P < 0.05) in 50:50 mixtures than in 25:75 mixtures (29.6 vs. 15.6%). The intercrops in Saskatoon did not differ in LER (0.89 ± 0.06; P > 0.05). In contrast, there was a cereal by seeding ratio interaction (P < 0.05) for LER at Lethbridge. At Saskatoon, cereal and pea CR were 4.9 ± 2.17 and 0.42 ± 0.25, respectively. Overall, pea intercropped at either seeding ratios with wheat, barley, triticale, and rye showed no yield benefits compared to the corresponding monocrops.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsFrench-language works237,207