Évaluation du potentiel agronomique de fourrages riches en tanins condensés ou en lactones sesquiterpènes dans quatre régions du Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’objectif était d’évaluer le potentiel agronomique, soit l’établissement, la survie hivernale, la production de biomasse et la valeur nutritive de nouvelles espèces fourragères riches en tanins condensés ou en lactones sesquiterpènes cultivées en semis pur et en association avec deux graminées fourragères, la fléole des prés (Phleum pratense L.) et la fétuque des prés (Festuca pratense Huds.), et ce, en gestion de pâturage dans quatre régions climatiques du Québec. L’expérience au champ s’est déroulée aux stations de recherche de Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue (Montréal), Saint-Augustin-de-Desmaures (Capitale-Nationale), La Pocatière (Bas-Saint-Laurent) et Normandin (Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean), pendant deux années (2016 et 2017). Sur l’ensemble des stations en 2017, la chicorée (Cichorium intybus L.) et le lotier corniculé (Lotus corniculatus L.) ont eu des rendements satisfaisants comparés à celui de la luzerne, et ce, à tous les sites, alors que le sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia Scop.) a moins bien performé. Le sainfoin avait des teneurs en tanins condensés (moyenne de 10,7 g kg-1 MS) et en protéines moyennement et lentement dégradables dans le rumen les plus élevées.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".