MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294192908 · doi:10.5539/jas.v8n4p179

Sulfur Nanoparticles Improves Root and Shoot Growth of Tomato

2016· article· en· W2294192908 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
N. Salem, Luma Al-Banna, Amany O. Abdeen, Qusay I. Ibrahim, Akl M. Awwad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicStructural mechanics and materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShootSulfurNanoparticleScanning electron microscopeChemistryAqueous solutionNuclear chemistryHorticultureMaterials scienceBiologyNanotechnologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this research work is to synthesize sulfur nanoparticles by green route and to investigate the beneficial effect on root and shoot growth of tomato. Sulfur nanoparticles (SNPs) synthesized using aqueous extract of Ailanthus altissima leaves at room temperature. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) inspections indicated that nanoparticles are spherical and polydispersed with diameters ranging between 5 and 80 nm. The potential of sulfur nanoparticles for enhancing tomato’s growth, increasing the concentration of sulfur nanoparticles from 100 ppm to 300 ppm cause an increase in root and shoot lengths, while higher concentration 400 ppm and 600 ppm induced an inhibitory effect. Results of this study reveal that SNPs have the potential to enhance root and shoot growth of tomato and the effect is concentration dependent.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations58
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicStructural mechanics and materialsFrench-language works237,207