MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1918619844 · doi:10.1614/ws-05-051r.1

Effect of humectants on the uptake and efficacy of glufosinate in wild oat (Avena fatua) plants and isolated cuticles under dry conditions

2006· article· en· W1918619844 on OpenAlexaff
R.J.L. Ramsey, G. R. Stephenson, J. Christopher Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueWeed Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Surface Properties and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumidityGlufosinateGlycerolRelative humidityAvena fatuaHorticultureChemistryBotanyBiologyAgronomyWeedBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A series of dose–response experiments were performed at low humidity to determine if glufosinate efficacy could be increased by lengthening the drying time through the addition of humectants. Of several humectants evaluated, only 5% glycerol or 5% triethylene glycol when applied with glufosinate produced dry weight reductions and mortality similar to exposure to high humidity.14C-glufosinate movement through isolated wild oat cuticles was greater at high humidity, poorest at low humidity, but intermediate at low humidity in the presence of 5% glycerol in the spray solution. The increases in uptake observed at high humidity and with 5% glycerol at low humidity were characterized by greater initial uptake that continued much longer than that observed at low humidity without humectant.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations25
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWeed ScienceSame topicPlant Surface Properties and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207