Effect of Different Inoculation Time on the Photosynthesis Characteristics of Camptotheca acuminata Seedlings With Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Taking Camptotheca acuminata seedlings as material,the effect of different inoculation time on the photosynthesis of Camptotheca acuminata seedlings with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi(AMF)in the greenhouse were studied.The results showed that AM formation was contributed to enhancement of the photosynthetic pigment content,net photosynthetic rate(Pn),stomatal conductance(Gs)and transpiration rate(Tr)in leaves of C.acuminataseedlings.But the promoting effect of AMF was got by different inoculation time,and weakened with the delay of inoculation time.The photosynthesis of seedlings inoculated with Acaulospora mellea at 0day and 20days after grow true leaf was obviously promoted.The chlorophyll a content,chlorophyll b content,total chlorophyll content,Pn,Gs and Tr of seedlings inoculated with A.melleaat 0day after grow true leaf were the highest,and which was remarkable higher than nonmycorrhizal seedlings.Also the effective quantum yield(EQY)and photochemical quenching(qP)was significantly higher than non-mycorrhizal seedlings.The chlorophyll a/b,carotenoid content and maximal photochemical efficiency of PSII in the dark(Fv/Fm)of seedlings inoculated with A.melleaat 20days after grow true leaf were the highest.The photosynthetic pigment content,Pn and Fv/Fm of seedlings inoculated with A.melleaover 20days after grow true leaf,which including the 40days,60days and 80days were higher than or closed to non-mycorrhizal seedlings.And the promoting effect was very limited.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".