MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994041543 · doi:10.1080/01448765.2011.9756647

‘Effective Micro-organisms’ (EM): An Effective Plant Strengthening Agent for Tomatoes in Protected Cultivation

2011· article· en· W1994041543 on OpenAlexaff
Roger K. Ndona, Jürgen K. Friedel, A. Spornberger, T. Rinnofner, K. Jezik

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Agriculture & Horticulture · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Plant Science, Crop Management
Canadian institutionsPlant Biotechnology Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBranSowingCompostHorticultureAgronomySubstrate (aquarium)ChemistryBiologyRaw material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of treating organically grown tomato plants with Effective Micro-organisms (EM) combined with a stone dust-suspension (EM treatment) was tested in a pot experiment in a foliar tunnel at the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna. In the EM treatment, the irrigation water was amended with EMa® and plants were treated with EM-stone dust-suspension. In the control treatment, tap water was used instead. In the EM treatment, bokashi, wheat bran fermented with EMa®, was additionally added to the planting substrate in both years. Only in 2007, the equivalent amount of wheat bran, composted without EMa® addition, was added to the substrate in the control as well. Inorganic N contents of the substrate were lower in the control in 2006, but increased when wheat bran compost was added in 2007. N mineralization at later stages of the experiment was higher in the EM treatment in 2007. Microbial biomass in the substrate was enhanced in both years. Total yield was higher and the number of fruits damaged by blossom-end rot was reduced in the EM-treated plants in 2007. The percentage of fruits in the best quality class was significantly higher in the EM treatment in both years. N, P and K contents in tomato leaves of the EM treatment were reduced, whereas the Fe content was higher. A more even N supply to the plants in the EM treatment, combined with the effect of a direct stone dust-application onto the plants, clearly increased plant yield and fostered plant health.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations36
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological Agriculture & HorticultureSame topicAgriculture, Plant Science, Crop ManagementFrench-language works237,207