Root Water Uptake and Root Nitrogen Mass of Winter Wheat and Their Simulations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) was grown in nutrient solution (Exp. 1) and soil columns (Exp. 2) under controlled environmental conditions to investigate the relationship between root water uptake (RWU) and root N mass (RNM). In Exp. 1, 15 treatments were designed to examine the influence of NO 3 concentrations (0.007–0.42 kg m −3 ) and illumination conditions (free water surface evaporation rates of 0.25–0.47 cm d −1 ) on root N content (RNC) and RWU. Measurements included transpiration, dry weight, N content, and root length. In Exp. 2, RNC and RWU of wheat were measured at two NO 3 levels (0.011 and 0.105 kg m −3 ) and low and high (80% field water capacity) soil water contents. The distributions of soil water content, NO 3 concentration, RNM density, root length density, and soil temperature were observed. Results showed that the potential transpiration was proportional to RNM of wheat ( R 2 = 0.99), and the maximum RWU rate, S max , which changed from 0 to 0.023 m 3 m −3 d −1 , was also linearly related to the RNM density ( R 2 = 0.78). The ratio between potential transpiration and RNM, namely the potential RWU coefficient per unit RNM, was independent of environmental NO 3 level and wheat maturity, but changed linearly with the free water surface evaporation rate ( R 2 = 0.88). The relationship between RWU and RNM was applied to simulate the distributions of soil water content, soil NO 3 concentration, and RNM density in Exp. 2. The simulated results compared well with the measured data, and the maximum RMSEs were 0.0085 m 3 m −3 , 0.0283 kg m −3 , and 0.0009 kg m −3 , respectively.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".