Seed germination of common weed species as affected by oxygen concentration, light, and osmotic potential
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laboratory experiments were conducted to determine the effects of oxygen concentration (21, 10, 5, and 2.5%), exposure to light, and osmotic potential on the germination of wheat, canola, and various weed species. Germination of most species increased as osmotic potential was increased. Seed germination for some species like barnyardgrass was inhibited by the combination of exposure to normoxic (21% oxygen) conditions and light. This combination of conditions may function as a signal to prevent soil surface germination. Wild mustard germination increased with increasing oxygen concentration when seeds were not exposed to light, whereas green foxtail germination was relatively insensitive to oxygen concentration. Wild oat germination increased with increasing osmotic potential, and osmotic potential had a greater influence when the seeds were exposed to light. Dandelion, foxtail barley, curly dock, and perennial sowthistle germination was affected more by osmotic potential and light exposure than by oxygen concentration. A better understanding of the mechanisms of depth detection for specific species will lead to a better understanding of their recruitment biology. This information may help model the potential for invasion and proliferation of each species as well as devise improved management strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".