MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2378143841

A Study On Technology For Breaking Dormancy of Polygonatum sibiricum Red. Seeds

2013· article· en· W2378143841 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiaoyan Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueSeed · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFlowering Plant Growth and Cultivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGerminationDormancyHorticultureBiologySalicylic acidSeed dormancyBotany
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to provide technical support for sexual propagation of Polygonatum sibiricum Red,we studied the effects of illumination,sand storage temperature,lukewarm water and exogenous growth regulating substances on the seed germination of Polygonatum sibiricum.The results showed that:Storing at 0 ℃ low-temperature sand under the condition of 120 days was favorite for seed germination;Seed germination rate under dark conditions was 37.78% which was higher than that under illumination of high germination rate,indicating that dark was beneficial for the germination of Polygonatum sibiricum seeds;After soaked 18-24 hours in 35-40 ℃ lukewarm waters,the germination rate of Polygonatum sibiricum seeds reached to 93.33%.Suitable concentration of GA3,6-BA,salicylic acid and chitosan increased the germination of Polygonatum sibiricum seeds significantly,and the germination time shortened remarkably.The concentration for GA3(150 mg/L) seed soaking 24 hours had the best effect,germination rate,germination potential,germination index and vigor index were up to 91.11%,62.22%,0.87 and 5.16,respectively;6-BA(100 mg/L) still can break bud dormancy in addition to promote seed germination.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeedSame topicFlowering Plant Growth and CultivationFrench-language works237,207