MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143865749 · doi:10.5539/jas.v6n8p41

Role of Foliar Application of Nicotinic Acid and Tryptophan on Onion Plants Response to Salinity Stress

2014· article· en· W2143865749 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. M. Hussein, Sawsan Y. El Faham, A. K. Alva

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalinityDry weightTap waterIrrigationChemistryHorticultureBulbAgronomyAnimal scienceEnvironmental scienceBiologyEnvironmental engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This experiment was conducted at the National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt during 2006 and 2007 winter season to evaluate the effects of spraying with tryptophan (TP) and nicotinic acids (NA) on onion plants grown under varying degree of salinity stress (irrigation water with 3000 and 6000 ppm salinity) as compared to tap water (300 ppm) irrigation. Irrigation by high salinity water decreased the number of leaves, mean bulb diameter, fresh and dry weight of bulb and whole plant. Foliar application of TP and NA significantly increased the top height and fresh weight, and bulb dry weight. The above beneficial effects were greater in the plants sprayed with NA as compared to those of the plants received TP spray. At the lower salinity level (3000 ppm), TP was more effective than NA in mitigating the negative effects of salinity stress. At the high salinity stress (6000 ppm), however, the converse was evident. The electrolyte leakage (EL) was not influenced by 3000 ppm salinity irrigation water as compared to that of the plants which received tap water (300 ppm) irrigations. However, it increased significantly in the plants irrigated by 6000 ppm salinity water. Lipid peroxidation (LP) and EL were significantly lower in the plants sprayed with TP or tapwater. In addition, spraying of NA or TP increased the plant growth and biomass weight. Therefore, the above foliar sprays appear to mitigate the negative effects of increased salinity.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations45
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicPlant Physiology and Cultivation StudiesFrench-language works237,207