MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031424654 · doi:10.1139/b04-041

Imbibition response of green foxtail, canola, wild mustard, and wild oat seeds to different osmotic potentials

2004· article· en· W2031424654 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Nathan S. Boyd, Rene C. Van Acker

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSeed Germination and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsImbibitionCanolaGerminationBrassicaFoxtailWater contentSetaria viridisBiologyAgronomyOsmotic pressureDesiccationHorticultureMustard seedWeedBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability of seeds to imbibe water depends on the difference in water potentials between the seed and the surrounding medium, as well as seed diffusivity. The proportional moisture content and imbibition rate of Brassica napus L. 'Liberty' (canola), Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. (green foxtail), Brassica kaber (DC.) L.C. Wheeler (wild mustard), and Avena fatua L. (wild oat) were examined over time in water and osmotic solutions of –0.5 and –1 MPa. Average imbibition rate of wild oat was significantly higher than that of all other species studied, while the average imbibition rate of green foxtail was significantly lower than that of all other species studied. Differences between imbibition rates may have been caused by differences in seed size or seed diffusivity. Wild mustard and canola had the highest proportional moisture content at 25 h and were the only two species to achieve greater than 80% germination within this time frame. Germination was reduced in osmotic solutions of –0.5 and –1 MPa compared with water for all species. Species differ in their ability to imbibe water as well as their ability to germinate at lower seed moisture contents.Key words: germination, weed, soil moisture, uptake, seed size.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations12
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicSeed Germination and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207