MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2374668017

Effect of Salt Stress on Activities of Antioxidant Enzymes and Superoxide Contents of New Willow Clone

2014· article· en· W2374668017 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Liu Du

Bibliographic record

VenueSeed · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWillowSuperoxide dismutaseChemistryAntioxidantclone (Java method)Point of deliverySalt (chemistry)Food scienceHorticultureBotanyBiochemistryBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper,three new willow clones was used as test materials,Studying on the effect of different NaCl stress on the antioxidant Enzymes and Superoxide Contents of new willow clones after 20 days. The biggest variation of SOD activities of three willow was Yanliu No. 1,the SOD activities of Yanliu No. 1 was increaed with the increasing of NaCl concentration,the maximum was 1. 54 times of the control,but the SOD activities of other two kinds of willow was first up and then down with the increase of NaCl concentration,the maximum of SOD activities of two kinds of willows was 1. 33 and 1. 09 times of the control respectively when the concentration of NaCl was 150 mmol /L and 100 mmol /L. The activities of POD increasing at first and then decreaseing as the NaCl concentration increasing,the maxium of Yanliu No. 1. was the 2. 14 times of the control; the activities of CAT was low as the low NaCl concentration,and then raising as the NaCl concentration was high,the variation of the Bo HaiNo. 5 was maximum. But the activities of Yanliu No. 1 was maximum. The contents of MDA of willow decreasing as the NaCl concentration was low then raising as the NaCl concentration was high. And the content of MDA of Yan Liu No. 1 was minimum. In the conclusion in the three willows the tolerance of salt stress of Yanliu No. 1 was best.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeedSame topicBioenergy crop production and managementFrench-language works237,207