Soil management strategies for processing tomato, Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Processing tomatoes are grown on approximately 6,000 ha in southwestern Ontario. Field experiments were conducted in 1998 and 1999 at two locations to explore the potential of alternative tillage practices, including zone-tillage, on growth, development, yield and quality of tomatoes. Growth measurements of leaf number, plant height, stem diameter, total above ground dry weight and LAI did not differ with tillage system. Rye (' Secale cereale' L.) used as a cover crop did not influence tomato growth or development. Yield differences were not observed for red and green tomato fruit harvested in the conventional, disked or zone-tillage treatments. Yield reductions were observed however, for both red and green fruit with no-tillage. The delay in crop maturity associated with no-till reduced the potential for the application of this tillage practice for tomato production. Tomato postharvest quality did not differ among tillage systems. Zone-tillage was found to be a viable alternative to the moldboard plow as a primary tillage practice for the production of processing tomatoes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".