Photosynthetic Daily Light Integral Influences Flowering Time and Crop Characteristics of Cyclamen persicum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was carried out to examine the effect of photosynthetic daily light integral (DLI) on the growth and flowering of cyclamen ( Cyclamen persicum Mill. ‘Metis Scarlet Red’). Plants with six fully unfolded leaves were grown at 24/16 °C (12 h/12 h) under an 8- or 16-h photoperiod at a photosynthetic photon flux of 50, 100, 150, 200, and 300 μmol·m −2 ·s −1 , which provided seven DLIs: 1.4, 2.9, 4.3, 5.8, 8.6, 11.5, and 17.3 mol·m −2 ·d −1 . Days to first flower decreased from 133 to 75 as DLI increased from 1.4 to 17.3 mol·m −2 ·d −1 , although the acceleration of flowering was less pronounced when the DLI was greater than 5.8 mol·m −2 ·d −1 . Mean leaf and flower number increased from 8.7 to 28.0 and from 0 to 14.7, respectively, as DLI increased from 1.4 to 11.5 mol·m −2 ·d −1 , but there was no further increase under a DLI of 17.3 mol·m −2 ·d −1 . Total dry weight and net photosynthetic rate showed a similar trend as leaf and flower number. We conclude that supplemental lighting can accelerate greenhouse production of potted cyclamen under a low ambient DLI (i.e., less than 12 mol·m −2 ·d −1 ).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".