Allelopathic Effects of Aqueous Extracts of Maize Root on Seed Germination and Seedling Growth of Tumorous Stem Mustard(Brassica juncea var.tumida Tsen et Lee)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Allelopathic effects of aqueous extracts from two varieties(‘Jingkenuo 120'and‘Zhongdan808')of maize root on seed germination and seedling growth of three varieties(Yongan xiaoye',‘Fuza No.2'and‘Fuza No.5')of tumorous stem mustard were studied indoors using a bioassay method.The results showed that the two varieties of maize all had strong allelopathic effects on tumorous stem mustard,it included three different types of allelopathy,such as promotion,inhibition and low-promoting and high-inhibiting.What's more,it was relevant to the varieties,concentration of aqueous extracts,and there were sensitivity difference in different growth periods and organs of receptor crops.The allelopathic intensity of two varieties of maize on seed germination decreased in the order of‘Zhongdan 808'and‘Jingkenuo 120',but seedling growth was in the opposite order.The allelopathic intensity on seedling growth was greater than on seed germination,the types of allelopathy on seedling growth was mainly promotion,and seed germination was mainly low-promoting and high-inhibiting.The types of allelopathy of root length and shoot height of tumorous stem mustard were mainly inhibition and promotion respectively.The sensitivity of three varieties of tumorous stem mustard to‘Jingkenuo 120'decreased in the order of‘Fuza No.5',‘Yongan xiaoye'and‘Fuza No.2',and that of three varieties of tumorous stem mustard to ‘Zhongdan 808'decreased in the order of ‘Yongan xiaoye',‘Fuza No.5'and‘Fuza No.2'.Therefore,we should choose ‘Yongan xiaoye'rather than‘Fuza No.5'in the maiz-tumorous stem mustard rotation systems based on this study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".