MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7035888253

Assessment of the role of soil structure and water content in the interpretation of spatial variation in yield and yield response to nitrogen

2000· dissertation· en· W7035888253 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2000
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicConservation Techniques and Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoil waterYield (engineering)LimitingWater contentSpatial variabilityNitrogenCarbon fibersWilting
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Least Limiting Water Range (LLWR), is defined as the range of water contents in which aeration, water and soil resistance are the least limiting for plant growth. It was hypothesized that the LLWR and water contents measured outside of the LLWR would explain much of the variation found in yield and yield response to fertilizer N. Water contents, soil properties and yields were measured on 12 sites across southern Ontario. Results showed that the LLWR parameters were poor predictors of the variability in yields. Many observed water contents were also found to be less than the wilting point. Kay et al. (1999) defined a lower water content limit based on the cessation of photosynthesis ([theta]0p). This study determined that the difference between water contents and [theta]0p (plant extractable water) correlated well with yield. Organic carbon was significantly correlated to yield and yield response, and improved yields under drought and saturated 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicConservation Techniques and StudiesFrench-language works237,207