Plant ionome diagnosis using sound balances: case study with mango (Mangifera Indica)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plant ionomes and soil nutrients are commonly diagnosed in agronomy using concentration and nutrient ratio ranges. However, both diagnoses are biased by redundancy of information, subcompositional incoherence and non-normal distribution inherent to compositional data, potentially leading to conflicting results and wrong inferences. Our objective was to present an unbiased statistical approach of plant nutrient diagnosis using a balance concept and mango (Mangifera indica) as test crop. We collected foliar samples at flowering stage in 175 mango orchards. The ionomes comprised 11 nutrients (S, N, P, K, Ca, Mg, B, Cu, Zn, Mn, Fe). Traditional multivariate methods were found to be biased. Ionomes were thus represented by unbiased balances computed as isometric log ratios (ilr). Soil fertility attributes (pH and bioavailable nutrients) were transformed into balances to conduct discriminant analysis. The orchards differed more from genotype than soil nutrient signatures. A customized receiver operating characteristic (ROC) iterative procedure was developed to classify tissue ionomes between balanced/misbalanced and high/low-yielders. The ROC partitioning procedure showed that the critical Mahalanobis distance of 4.08 separating balanced from imbalanced specimens about yield cut-off of 128.5 kg fruit tree(-1) proved to be a fairly informative test (area under curve = 0.84-0.92). The [P | N,S] and [Mn | Cu,Zn] balances were found to be potential sources of misbalance in the less productive orchards, and should thus be further investigated in field experiments. We propose using a coherent pan balance diagnostic method with median ilr values of top yielders centered at fulcrums of a mobile and the critical Mahalanobis distance as a guide for global nutrient balance. Nutrient concentrations in weighing pans assisted appreciating nutrients as relative shortage, adequacy or excess in balances.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".