MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7025207526

Tolerance of Winter Wheat to Herbicides is Influenced by Weather Conditions, Growth Stage and Fungicide Tank-mixes

2012· dissertation· en· W7025207526 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGerman Economic Analysis & Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsGrain Farmers of Ontario
KeywordsWinter wheatTebuconazoleFungicideRed CloverYield (engineering)Biomass (ecology)Crop yield
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Field studies were conducted in Ontario in 2009 and 2010 to determine the tolerance of winter wheat to herbicide-fungicide tank-mixtures, and the tolerance of winter wheat underseeded red clover to commonly used herbicides applied at three timings. Tank-mixtures including the fungicide tebuconazole caused injury at early and late timings, while mixtures including the herbicide bromoxynil/MCPA were most injurious when applied late in the season. Injury was transient with no yield reductions observed. MCPA/mecoprop/dicamba caused significant yield reductions when applied at normal and late timings, but did not reduce yield when applied early. The herbicides prosulfuron+bromoxynil and pyrasulfotole/bromoxynil were most injurious to underseeded red clover and reduced clover biomass regardless of application timing. Herbicides and herbicide-fungicide tank-mixtures applied early, during cold temperatures do not increase winter wheat or red clover sensitivity; the likelihood of injury is greatest when applications of these products occur late.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicGerman Economic Analysis & PoliciesFrench-language works237,207