MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2391976682

Effects of Priming Treatment with PEG on the Seed Germination and Seedling Growth of Non-heading Chinese Cabbage

2012· article· en· W2391976682 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chang Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueSeed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSeed Germination and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGerminationSeedlingPriming (agriculture)PEG ratioPoint of deliveryCultivarCatalaseBiologyHorticultureSugarSuperoxide dismutasePeroxidaseAgronomyAntioxidantEnzymeFood scienceBiochemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The seeds of three non-heading Chinese cabbage cultivars Xinxiaqing 2,Xiadong qing,and Huawang were used as experimental materials,and the effects of priming treatment with PEG on the seed germination and physiological characters of seedlings were studied under different temperatures.The results showed that after priming treatment germination rate,germination vigor,germination index,vigor index of seeds,and the fresh and dry weights of seedlings were higher than those of control.The priming treatment with PEG significantly improved the activities of superoxide dismutase(SOD),peroxidase(POD) and catalase(CAT) of the seedlings but decreased the content of malondiadehyde(MDA),resulting in that the soluble protein and soluble sugar contents in the treated seedlings were significantly higher than those of control.There were some differences in priming effects among different cultivars.The results showed that priming treatment with PEG could improve both the seed vigor and stress resistance of non-heading Chinese cabbage seedlings.

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)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeedSame topicSeed Germination and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207