MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058178725 · doi:10.1007/s11099-012-0034-6

Ecophysiological characteristics of two carrot (Daucus carota L.) cultivars in response to agroecological factors and nitrogen application

2012· article· en· W2058178725 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Thiagarajan, Rajasekaran R. Lada, Azure Adams

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotosynthetica · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of Agriculture
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDaucus carotaStomatal conductanceCultivarTranspirationPhotosynthesisSowingWater-use efficiencyAgronomyBiologyHorticulturePlant physiologyNitrogenChemistryBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant density, planting time, harvest timing, and nitrogen influence on short-term gas-exchange properties of carrot cultivars, Topcut and Sugarsnax (Daucus carota L.) were investigated under field conditions. Net photosynthetic rate (P N), stomatal conductance (g s), and transpiration rate (E) differed significantly with the cultivars studied. Both planting and harvest timing changed the midday P N rates. P N increased as harvest timing advanced regardless of planting time. Late planting combined with late harvesting registered the maximum P N rates (4.5 μmol m-2 s-1). The water-use efficiency (WUE) was altered by temperature at different harvest timings along with the choice of cultivar. Early harvested Sugarsnax had a higher WUE (2.29 mmol mol-1) than TopCut (1.64 mmol mol-1) as Sugarsnax exhibited more stomatal conductance than TopCut. These changes were principally governed by fluctuations observed with air temperature and photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) and altered by the sensitivity of the cultivars to ecological factors. Plant density did not affect the photosynthetic gas-exchange parameters. Our results suggest that carrots manage high population density solely through morphological adaptations with no photosynthetic adjustments. Carrot leaves responded to N application in a curvilinear fashion in both cultivars. N did not alter g s, E, or WUE in carrots. N, applied at a rate of 150 kg N ha-1, increased foliar N up to 2.98%. We conclude that 2.98% of foliar N is sufficient to achieve the maximum photosynthetic rates in processing carrots.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhotosyntheticaSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207