Effect of Foliar Application of Chitin and Chitosan Oligosaccharides on Photosynthesis of Maize and Soybean
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On the first day after foliar application, chitosan pentamer (CH5) and chitin pentamer (CHIT5) decreased net photosynthetic rate (PN) of soybean and maize, however, on subsequent days there was an increase in PN in some treatments. CH5 caused an increase in maize PN on day 3 at 10-5 and 10-7 M; the increases were 18 and 10 % over the control plants. This increase was correlated with increases in stomatal conductance (gs) and transpiration rate (E), while the intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci) was not different from the control plants. PN of soybean plants did not differ from the control plants except for treatment CH5 (10-7 M) which caused an 8 % increase on day 2, along with increased gs, E, and Ci. On days 5 and 6 the CHIT5 treatment caused a 6-8 % increase in PN of maize, which was accompanied by increases in gs, E, and Ci. However, there was no such increase for soybean plants treated with CHIT5. In general, foliar application of high molecular mass chitin (CHH) resulted in decreased PN, particularly for 0.010 % treated plants, both in maize and soybean. Foliar applications of chitosan and chitin oligomers did not affect (p > 0.05) maize or soybean height, root length, leaf area, shoot or root or total dry mass.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it