MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131036662 · doi:10.5539/jas.v1n1p92

Effects of Plant Growth Regulator on Endogenous Hormone Levels during the Period of the Red Globe Growth

2009· article· en· W2131036662 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juan He, Songlin Yu, Chao Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndogenyGibberellinAbscisic acidHormoneCytokininGibberellic acidGrowth hormonePlant growthEndocrinologyPlant hormoneInternal medicineChemistryBiologyBotanyBiochemistryAuxinMedicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective. The present study was aimed to elucidate the dynamic changes of endogenous hormone levels during thefruit growth and the changing regulation of endogenous hormone levels between normal and abnormal fruits.Methods. After using exogenous GA3 and GA3+6-BA, endogenous hormone levels such as indoleacetic acid(IAA),cytokinin(ZR), abscisic acid(ABA) and gibberellin(GA3) in normal fruits and rigid abnormal ones were determined byenzyme-linked immunosorbent assays(ELISA), respectively.Results. The results indicated that the treatments of 20mg/kg GA3 and the combination of 20mg/kg GA3+10 mg/kg6-BA had no remarkable effects on increasing average weight of berries where the vertical diameter of grape fruits waslonger than the transverse diameter. Exogenous hormone GA3 and GA3+6-BA mixture also affected the endogenoushormone levels. The content of IAA, ABA and ZR was lower in the rigid abnormal fruits than that in the normal ones,respectively, and those levels during the rapid growth period were nearly in accordance with those during the slowgrowth period.Conclusion. The fruit growth was closely related to the endogenous hormone levels.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207