MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060300185 · doi:10.4161/psb.6.4.14305

Topology of a maize field

2011· article· en· W2060300185 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Patrice G. Dubois, Thomas P. Brutnell

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Signaling & Behavior · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLight effects on plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyPhotosynthetically active radiationShadingSowingZea maysAgronomySunlightField experimentBotanyHorticulturePhotosynthesisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Correlations were established between plant height and Cartesian position in a field of diverse maize (Zea mays) germplasm. The influence of the shade avoidance syndrome (SAS), a series of responses to lower photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and red to far-red light ratio (R:FR) at high planting density, was detected by a steep increase of plant height from the edge to interior rows of the field. In addition, a gradual increase in height was observed across the field from east to west. We attribute this result to a R:FR gradient caused by sunlight laterally penetrating the stand at dusk. Furthermore, we hypothesize that the increased height of west-positioned plants may be analogous to responses induced by end-of-day FR (EOD-FR) treatments used by photobiologists to induce SAS in controlled environments. While preliminary, these results nevertheless suggest that a plant's position in a field will influence the impact of daily fluctuations in PAR and R:FR in modulating plant height and, potentially, other agronomically relevant traits.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Signaling & BehaviorSame topicLight effects on plantsFrench-language works237,207