Effect of ~(60)Co-γRay on Wheat Seed Germination,Seedling Growth and Physiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
11 wheat varieties's dry seeds were radiated by ~(60)Co-γray.The results showed that one variety's germination energy,germination rate and germination index of treatment were significantly lower than those of control;7 varieties's length of buds of treatment were significantly or extreme significantly higher than those of control;11 varieties's length of root and activity index of treatment were significantly or extreme significantly lower than those of control;8 varieties's root/bud of treatment were significantly or extreme significantly lowe- rer than control;9 varieties's seedling rate of treatment was significantly lower than that of control. 9 varieties's plant survival rate of treatment was significantly lower than that of control.11 varieties's singal tiller rate,length of leaves,breadth of leaves,root length and winter tiller per plant of treatment were signifi- cantly lower than those of control.9 varieties's winter tiller per plant of treatment was significantly or extreme significantly lowerer than control;7 varieties's content of soluble protein of treatment was significantly or ex- treme significantly lower than control.6 varieties's content of propanedial of treatment was significantly or ex- treme significantly higher than control;10 varieties's content of POD enzyme were significantly or extreme sig- nificantly higher than those of control.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".