ArticleScientific reports2021
Incorporating the field border effect to reduce the predicted uncertainty of pollen dispersal model in Asia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The presence of the field border (FB), such as roadways or unplanted areas, between two fields is common in Asian farming system. This study evaluated the effect of the FB on the cross-pollination (CP) and predicted the CP rate in the field considering and not considering FB. Three experiments including 0, 6.75, and 7.5 m width of the FB respectively were conducted to investigate the effect of distance and the FB on the CP rate. The dispersal models combined kernel and observation model by calculating the parameter of observation model from the output of kernel. These models were employed to predict the CP rate at different distances. The Bayesian method was used to estimate parameters and provided a good prediction with uncertainty. The highest average CP rates in the field with and without FB were 74.29% and 36.12%, respectively. It was found that two dispersal models with the FB effect displayed a higher ability to predict average CP rates. The correlation coefficients between actual CP rates and CP rates predicted by the dispersal model combined zero-inflated Poisson observation model with compound exponential kernel and modified Cauchy kernel were 0.834 and 0.833, respectively. Furthermore, the predictive uncertainty was reducing using the dispersal models with the FB effect.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.