Effects of Phosphorus Fertilizer Supplementation on Antioxidant Enzyme Activities in Tomato Fruits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of soil and foliar phosphorus supplementation on the activities and levels of superoxide dismutase (SOD), guaiacol peroxidase (POX), and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) in tomato fruits were evaluated by determining enzyme activities and isoenzyme analysis. Both protein levels and enzyme activities varied depending on the variety and season. In general, phosphorus supplementation did not alter SOD, POX, and APX activities significantly;however, some treatments showed season- and stage-specific enhancement in activities as noticed with hydrophos and seniphos supplementation. Three different SOD isozymes were observed, and these isozymes showed very similar staining intensities in response to P application and during the three developmental stages studied. Two major isozymes of POX and two different APX isozymes were observed at all the developmental stages. The results suggest that antioxidant enzyme activities may be influenced by the availability of phosphorus, but are subject to considerable variation depending on the developmental stage and the season.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".