Root growth, appearance and disappearance in perennial grasses: Effects of the timing of water stress with or without defoliation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of early and late defoliations were evaluated under different levels of soil water content on root growth, appearance and disappearance in Stipa clarazii Ball. S. tenuis Phil., and S. gynerioides Phil. Field studies were conducted in 1995. 1996 and early 1997. Stipa clarazii and S. tenuis are two important palatable perennial tussock grasses in temperate, semiarid rangelands of central Argentina. where S. gynerioides is one of the most abundant, unpalatable perennial grass species. We hypothesized that (1) root growth is reduced after defoliation at any phenological stage in S. clarazii and S. tenuis in comparison to undefoliated controls, (2) root growth. and root appearance and disappearance in all three species decrease as plant water stress increases, and (3) root growth associated with water stress in S. clarazii and S. tenuis is reduced comparatively less when plants are water-stressed earlier than later, or for a longer period of time during the growing season. Our results led us to reject hypothesis 1 and to accept hypotheses 2 and 3. Maintenance of root growth after defoliation in S. clarazii and S. tenuis would allow these species a greater soil exploration and resource finding to sustain regrowth in their native, semiarid environments. Key words: Root growth, appearance and disappearance, perennial grasses, water stress, defoliation, Stipa species
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".