Production d'une substance rhizogène à effet similaire à celui de l'acide indole acétique par le ver de terre<i>Lumb</i><i>ricus terrestris</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In vitro biological tests show that excreta or gross total and partial extracts of Lumbricus terrestris stimulate rhizogenesis and enhance root growth in young plants of the bean Phaseolus vulgaris. Similar results were obtained in experiments with worms freshly collected in the field and with worms previously deprived of food for 4 weeks. The rhizogenous substance produced by the worms is therefore not of exogenous origin, coming from the soil via the digestive tract. The similar effects of indol acetic acid at different concentrations and of excreta and gross extracts of worms in various dilutions indicate that the rhizogenous substance is similar to indol acetic acid, a well-known phytohormone in plants. Expressed as indol acetic acid equivalents, the quantity of the rhizogenous substance in worms would be approximately 18 × 103ng/g, of which half (9 × 103ng/g) is released in the excreta alone.[Journal translation]
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".