MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136301519 · doi:10.1007/s11099-011-0031-1

Water-stress and N-nutrition effects on photosynthesis and growth of Brassica carinata

2011· article· en· W2136301519 on OpenAlexaff
Xue Pan, Rajasekaran R. Lada, C. D. Caldwell, Kevin C. Falk

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotosynthetica · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of AgricultureAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotosynthesisBiologyWater-use efficiencyBrassica carinataBrassicaNitrogenAgronomyLimitingPlant physiologyHorticultureBotanyAnimal scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effects of water and nitrogen (N) supply on growth and photosynthetic response of B. carinata were examined in this study. Plant growth and related characteristics varied significantly in response to the availability of water and nitrogen. B. carinata maximized the utilization efficiency of the most limiting resources by developing physiological adaptations, such as changes in root and leaf development. The utilization of water and N was tightly linked with the availability of each resource. Instantaneous water-use efficiency (WUE) was always greater in plants with high-N nutrition [50, 100, and 150 kg(N) ha-1] than in the low-N-treated plants [0 kg(N) ha-1] in all watering treatments. Instantaneous N-use efficiency (PNUE) decreased significantly with increasing water stress in all N treatments. Seed yield is significantly related to PNUE (p>0.05) but not WUE (p<0.05). The positive relationship between leaf net photosynthetic rate (P N) and seed yield suggests that P N can be used as an important tool for selection of new strains with high seed yield.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations33
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhotosyntheticaSame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207