MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018679063 · doi:10.4141/cjps08184

Field evaluation of asparagus crowns and germinating seeds inoculated with plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria

2009· article· en· W2018679063 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Scott M. Liddycoat, D. J. Wolyn

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhizobacteriaAsparagusGerminationSeedlingBiologyInoculationShootHorticultureAgronomyGreenhouseDry weightRhizosphereBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) have the ability to enhance growth and establishment by reducing stress ethylene, or providing exogenous indol-3-acetic acid (IAA), nitrogen, iron, or phosphorus. In previous greenhouse studies, PGPR inoculation of asparagus seeds or seedlings enhanced growth under optimal and water stress conditions. Experiments were conducted in this study to determine if PGPR could provide benefits to transplanted crowns and germinating seeds in the field. Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria did not positively affect shoot height, count, or diameter of inoculated crowns, or percent germination and seedling dry weight of inoculated seeds. The limitations of using PGPR in the field and potential for future success are discussed.Key words: Asparagus officinalis, Pseudomonas , water stress, drought, irrigation

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207