楼主: 贫困线821
329 0

[英文文献] An Empirical Investigation of the Stanford’s “1.2 Rule” for Nitrogen Fertil... [推广有奖]

  • 0关注
  • 0粉丝

等待验证会员

学前班

0%

还不是VIP/贵宾

-

威望
0
论坛币
0 个
通用积分
0
学术水平
0 点
热心指数
0 点
信用等级
0 点
经验
10 点
帖子
0
精华
0
在线时间
0 小时
注册时间
2020-9-22
最后登录
2020-9-22

楼主
贫困线821 发表于 2006-4-9 08:39:09 |AI写论文

+2 论坛币
k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群
赵安豆老师微信:zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币!

+2 论坛币
英文文献:An Empirical Investigation of the Stanford’s “1.2 Rule” for Nitrogen Fertilizer Recommendation
英文文献作者:Rodriguez, Divina Gracia P.,Bullock, David S.
英文文献摘要:
We evaluate an old and widely accepted rule of thumb for fertilizer management in corn production: apply 1.2 pounds of nitrogen fertilizer per bushel of corn expected. This “1.2 Rule” has dominated fertilizer management recommendations for almost fifty years, and similar algorithms have been used all over the world to make fertilizer recommendations for other crops. Here we show that the 1.2 Rule only makes economic sense if the production satisfies two restrictions: (1) to be of the von Liebig functional form, i.e. the function has a “kink” and a “plateau,” and (2) the kinks of the von Liebig response curves for different growing conditions lie on a ray out of the origin with slope 1.2. Non-linear estimation techniques and non-nested hypothesis framework are used to test if the 1.2 Rule satisfies these restrictions. We conclude that there exists little scientific justification of the 1.2 Rule, and that its long-term and widespread use basically resulted from its long-term and widespread use.
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝


您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 我要注册

本版微信群
扫码
拉您进交流群
GMT+8, 2026-2-18 02:52