MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058337960 · doi:10.2134/agronmonogr46.c14

Rhizosphere Microorganisms and Plant Phosphorus Uptake

2005· book-chapter· en· W2058337960 on OpenAlexaff
Iver Jakobsen, Mary Leggett, Alan E. Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy monograph/Agronomy · 2005
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsAg-West Bio (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhizosphereMicroorganismRoot hairBulk soilMicrobial inoculantPhosphorusAgronomyBiologyBotanyChemistryEnvironmental scienceBacteriaHorticultureInoculation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soil microorganisms play a significant role in the transfer of phosphorus (P) within terrestrial ecosystems. Microbial processes in soil are important for the distribution of P between various inorganic and organic P fractions and subsequently for the potential availability of phosphate for plant acquisition. This chapter focuses on the contribution of soil microorganisms to plant nutrition through their capacity to increase the availability of soil P and its subsequent acquisition by plants. Emphasis is placed on the processes and mechanisms involved in P mobilization in relation to the rhizosphere. Microorganisms that interact with plant roots and their associated processes within the rhizosphere are of particular importance. Microbial influences on the availability and uptake of P by soil-grown plants are of both direct and indirect nature. Mycorrhizal fungi are effective in increasing the root-absorptive surface area, and microbial release of phytohormones may lead to enhancement of root branching and root hair development.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.163 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations88
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy monograph/AgronomySame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207