MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145473610 · doi:10.1093/jxb/erf034

The major Nod factor of Bradyrhizobium japonicum promotes early growth of soybean and corn

2002· article· en· W2145473610 on OpenAlexafffund
Alfred Souleimanov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Botany · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsBradyrhizobium japonicumNodNod factorBiologyAgronomyBradyrhizobiumDry matterChemistryHorticultureSymbiosisRhizobiaceaeRoot noduleBacteriaInoculationBiochemistryRhizobium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Greenhouse experiments were conducted to evaluate the effect of Nod factor Nod Bj-V (C18:1, MeFuc) of Badyrhizobium japonicum on the growth of soybean and corn. Three-day-old seedlings of soybean and corn were grown in hydroponic solutions containing four concentrations (0, 10(-7), 10(-9) or 10(-11) M) of Nod factor. After 7 d of treatment, Nod factor enhanced soybean and corn biomass. Nod factor elicited profound effects on root growth resulting in 34-44% longer roots in soybean. More detailed analyses of the roots, using a scanner based image analysis system, revealed that Nod factor increased the total length, projected area and surface area of the roots and decreased the diameter of soybean roots, while it increased the total length of corn roots. Stem injection of soybean plants with 10(-7) M Nod factor resulted in increased dry matter accumulation. These results suggest that Nod factor, besides mediating early stages of nodulation, has more general plant growth-promoting effects.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations123
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BotanySame topicLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisFrench-language works237,207