Evaluation the Aluminum Tolerance of Aegilops tauschii Using Hydroponic Nutrient Solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study,aluminum tolerance of forty-five Aegilops tauschii were evaluated using three treatments of pH4.50,pH4.50+50μmol/L Al3+ and pH4.50 +100 μmol/L Al3+ hydroponic nutrient solutions.The result showed that there were relative remarkable genetic variation in root regenerate lengths (RRL) and aluminum tolerance index (RTI) among accessions.The RRL were the longest at pH4.50,while those in pH4.50+100μmol/L Al3+ were the shortest.The RTI varied from 0.18 to 0.49 at pH4.50+50 μmol/L Al3+,with an average of 0.33.While RTI varied from 0.09 to 0.32 at pH4.50+100 μmol/L Al3+,with an average of 0.18.When the root treated with 50μmol/L Al3+ and stained with hematoxylin,all of the accessions were stained heavy as scale 3,except for As65 and As88 stained as light as scale 2,while CS stained much lighter than the others and with scale 1.Combined with hematoxylin stain scale and aluminum tolerance index,it was suggested that all of the Aegilops tauschii accessions were sensitive to aluminum.Based on this study,Aegilops tauschii might not one of the best candidates for improving the aluminum tolerance of wheat.
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 | 0.001 | 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".