Study on Allelopathy of Planting Soil Aqueous Extract form Codonopsis pilosula and A. membranaceus. var. mongolicus on Zea mays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose was to discuss allelopathy of Planting soil aqueous extract form Codonopsis pilosula and A.membranaceus.var.mongolicus on Zea mays,The effect of the different treating concentrations of queous extract,which was added in the sand of beaker expermient inside with the concentration of 0.5,0.25,0.125,0.062 5 g/mL on seed germination and seedling growth of Zea mays was studied by bioassay method.The results showed that aqueous extract to inhibition Zea mays on the course of seed relative imbibition increased in the volume of water,the seed germination rate,germination index,seedling growth and the roots;in the Vicia faba plant was firstly raised and then reduced with the increment of aqueous extract concentration.The low concentration could stimulated the synthesis of chloroplast pigments,but restrain for its high concentration.The content of dissolubility,malonaldehyde and Pro in the leaf was increased with the increment of queous extract concentration.Sense of allelopathic effects of Zea mays from the strong to weak as follows:Codonopsis pilosula and A.membranaceus.var.mongolicusA.membranaceus.var.mongolicus.Codonopsis pilosula.
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) | 0.001 | 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".