MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052116712 · doi:10.4141/p99-014

Plant mineral accumulation, use and transport during the life cycle of plants: A review

2000· review· en· W2052116712 on OpenAlexaffvenue
A. Liptay, Andrea Arévalo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and Effects
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeedlingAgronomyNutrientMineralCropBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minerals accumulated during each stage of plant development are important, especially for the initial portion of subsequent stages of growth. For example, minerals acquired during seed ontogeny are largely responsible for the earliest stage of seedling growth. Without these minerals, seedling development would be arrested or impossible. Thus, even though the amount of minerals may be relatively small in the seed, their presence is absolutely essential. Similarly, although the mineral nutrient content of a seedling used as a transplant in establishing a crop in the field may seem rather minuscule, the importance to the initiation of development of the successive stage of growth is critical. Moreover, seedling-mineral content, plant performance and seed production can be improved by the selection of optimal cultural practices. This review examines acquisition, content and use of minerals in the various stages of plant development and growth as well as agricultural approaches to enhance mineral accumulation. Key words: Nutrient uptake, field crop establishment, seed mineral content, seed yield, crop growth

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations20
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and EffectsFrench-language works237,207