Wheat root dynamics as affected by landscape position
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of landscape position on root production and mortality were assessed in a 90-cm-deep soil profile at a shoulder and footslope landscape position seeded to spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Root length was measured over eight sampling dates using a minirhizotron system, and soil water content and temperature were recorded at various depths at each landscape position. The shoulder position was drier than the footslope position in the upper 30 cm due to a greater frequency and duration of soil temperatures > 20°C, and at depth (> 75 cm). Mean root length was greatest at the footslope position and was concentrated in the upper 20 cm of the profile, while the shoulder position had the greatest root length at the 40- to 60-cm depth. Mean daily root production peaked at 5.0 to 6.0 m m-2 d-1 at the 43rd day after planting (DAP) for both landscape positions, which corresponded to the time of booting. Daily rates for root mortality ranged from 0.5 to 2.5 m m-2 d-1. Soil water content and daily root production at the 10-cm depth were positively correlated at both landscape positions. Information on landscape position differences in root productivity and mortality could help to improve placement of inorganic fertilizers, and estimation of below-ground carbon sequestration. Key words: Wheat, roots, minirhizotron, landscape position
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".