MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967631315 · doi:10.1081/pln-200055522

Grapevine Growth and Physiological Responses to Iron Deficiency

2005· article· en· W1967631315 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Massimo Bertamini, N. Nedunchezhian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plant Nutrition · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsIron deficiencyPhotosynthesisDry matterAbscissionBiologyAbiotic componentCalcareousAgronomyChlorosisCalcareous soilsPhotosynthetic capacityMediterranean climateHorticultureBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iron (Fe) deficiency is one of the major abiotic stresses affecting fruit tree crops growing in calcareous soils in the Mediterranean region. A better understanding of changes in the growth and physiological characteristics of grapevine plants during the development of Fe deficiency will help to improve Fe fertilizer management recommendations. An experiment was conducted in field conditions to determine the effects of Fe deficiency during vegetative growth on leaf photosynthesis, dry matter accumulation, pigments, and other physiological parameters. Iron deficiency considerably decreased leaf net photosynthetic rate, leaf area, and dry matter accumulation. Depressed photosynthesis and plant growth resulted in increased fruit abscission and changes in dry matter among plant tissues. The results help explain the effects of Fe deficiency on suppression of grapevine growth and yield and provide information for improving the diagnosis of Fe deficiency in grapevine production.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations47
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plant NutritionSame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207