MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052409021 · doi:10.1139/b05-118

Computed tomography scanning for three-dimensional imaging and complexity analysis of developing root systems

2005· article· en· W2052409021 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Melinda Lontoc-Roy, Pierre Dutilleul, Shiv O. Prasher, Liwen Han, Donald L. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScannerComputed tomographyFractal dimensionTomographyRoot systemRoot (linguistics)CropMathematicsNuclear medicineComputer scienceFractalBiologyArtificial intelligenceBotanyMedicineAgronomyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To improve our understanding of the role of root systems in soil-based resource acquisition by plants and eventually model it completely, root system complexity must be quantified, in addition to other morphometric traits. In this note, we introduce a new approach in which computed tomography (CT) scan data are collected on crop root systems in three-dimensional (3-D) space nondestructively and noninvasively, thus allowing for repeated measurements and a relevant complexity analysis of root systems. The experimental crop is maize ( Zea mays L.). Four potted seedlings were CT scanned under wet soil conditions on the day of emergence, and each of the two following days. Specifically, a high-resolution X-ray CT scanner formerly used for medical purposes produced 3 × 500 CT images of 0.1 mm thick cross-sections for each seedling. The fractal dimension of each root system on each day was estimated on a skeletonized 3-D image reconstructed from CT scan data. We found that the mean fractal dimension value was not significantly greater than 1 on day 1 (1.015 ± 0.015), contrary to days 2 and 3 (1.037 ± 0.015, 1.065 ± 0.016). Our results, including original 3-D images, provide support for a novel type of root system studies based on the collection and advanced analysis of CT scan data.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations35
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207