MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169746462 · doi:10.1002/jpln.200320309

Factors contributing to the development of aluminum resistance in the Madeiran maize germplasm

2004· article· en· W2169746462 on OpenAlexaff
Miguel Â. A. Pinheiro de Carvalho, Jan J. Ślaski, Ivo Abreu, Filipe Ganança, Teresa M. M. dos Santos, Lurdes Freitas, Maria R. Clemente Vieira, Antonieta Nunes, Ana Maria Domingues, Gregory J. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAluminum toxicity and tolerance in plants and animals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Environment and Protected Areas
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermplasmBiologyCultivarAgronomySoil waterNutrientHorticultureEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Forty genotypes representing maize genetic diversity from the Island of Madeira were screened for resistance to aluminum (Al) in nutrient solution. Seeds of maize were obtained from local farmers from field plots spread around the island in a range of altitudes from 99 to 1000 m above sea level. The content of ionic aluminum and the pH of soils cultivated with maize were determined. The mean pH value of all examined soils was 4.9, while the mean ionic Al content was 0.76 cmol kg –1 . Seventy‐two hours (h) exposure to 100 and 200 μM Al followed by a 48 h recovery period of 4‐day old seedlings revealed significant differences in Al resistance in the Madeiran maize germplasm. Root survival and regrowth exceeding 80 % of the seedlings were observed in 22 and 8 of the tested genotypes screened at 100 and 200 μM Al in nutrient solution. High Al resistance among Madeiran maize genotypes appeared not to be associated with the lower pH of soil, and did not correlate with the amount of soil Al 3+ or the altitude at the site of collection. The high level of Al resistance of the maize cultivars indicates an initial genetic trait enhanced by open pollination of maize.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plant Nutrition and Soil ScienceSame topicAluminum toxicity and tolerance in plants and animalsFrench-language works237,207