MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056291571 · doi:10.1080/00103624.2013.790404

A Commercial Extract of Brown Macroalga (<i>Ascophyllum nodosum</i>) Affects Yield and the Nutritional Quality of Spinach<i>In Vitro</i>

2013· article· en· W2056291571 on OpenAlexaffabout
Di Fan, D. Mark Hodges, Alan T. Critchley, Balakrishnan Prithiviraj

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Growth Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of AgricultureAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaAcadian Seaplants (Canada)Dalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAscophyllumSpinaciaDPPHChlorophyllSpinachBotanyBiochemistryAntioxidantBiologyChemistryFood scienceHorticultureAlgae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of extracts of the brown marine alga (Ascophyllum nodosum, ANE) on growth and biochemical and molecular changes in spinach were studied. Overall increases in biomass, chlorophyll, and antioxidant activity were observed at an application rate of 0.1 g L –1 ANE. Shoot fresh weight, dry-matter content, and total soluble protein showed 1.6-, 1.2-, and 1.5-fold increases, respectively. Total chlorophyll increased by 30% and total antioxidant capacity, phenolics, and flavonoid content increased by at least 33%. A 1.4-fold increase in chalcone isomerase activity was observed, whereas the activity of phenylalanine ammonia lyase was not affected. The ANE affected the transcript abundance of genes that affect sucrose and glycine betaine metabolism. The transcript abundance of cytosolic glutamine synthetase (GS1), betaine aldehyde dehydrogenase (BADH), choline monooxygenase (CMO), and glutathione reductase (GR) increased in plants treated with 0.1 g L –1 ANE.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations159
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications in Soil Science and Plant AnalysisSame topicPlant Growth Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207