A quantitative analysis of seed dormancy and germination in the winter annual weed <i>Sinapis arvensis</i> (Brassicaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aims of this study were to determine the effects of burial on germination and longevity, and of water stress and temperature on germination and dormancy induction of the weed Sinapis arvensis L. During exposure to the high temperatures of summer, seeds buried in the field became nondormant, but low water potential and supra-optimal temperatures (constant not alternating) induced them into secondary dormancy. The threshold temperature for dormancy induction (TTDI) was about 19 °C when water was not limiting germination, and it decreased with a slope of 10 °C per MPa as water potential decreased. Seeds had minimum dormancy (D min ) when T < TTDI, and D min decreased by 81.5% per MPa increase in water potential. Dormancy induction increased linearly with a slope of 13.23% for each additional centimetre of burial depth from 1.0 to 5.19 cm. Dormancy was induced to its highest level (96%) in seeds buried at a depth of ≥5.19 cm; the remaining seeds were dead or were presumed to be dead Sinapis arvensis can form a persistent soil seed bank, and either water stress or conditions associated with increased burial depth can promote induction of secondary dormancy in the seeds.
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".