MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2415103750 · doi:10.21273/hortsci.35.3.401b

073 Stomatal Density as a Correlated Trait to Postharvest Longevity in Antirrhinum majus L. (Snapdragon)

2000· article· en· W2415103750 on OpenAlexaff
William J. Martin, Dennis P. Stimart

Bibliographic record

VenueHortScience · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFlowering Plant Growth and Cultivation
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntirrhinum majusStomatal densityPostharvestBiologyVase lifeHorticultureWiltingBotanyGermplasmCut flowersCultivarPhotosynthesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stomatal density is being investigated as a highly correlated trait to postharvest longevity (PHL) and subsequently may be used for selection in early generations of breeding germplasm. To this end, leaf imprints were created from Antirrhinum majus L. (snapdragon) P 1 , P 2 , F 1 , BC 1 (F 1 ×P 1 ), BC 2 (F 1 ×P 2 ), F 2 , and F 3 plants and evaluated for stomatal densities. Cut flowers of P 1 , P 2 , F 1 , BC 1 (F 1 ×P 1 ), BC 2 (F 1 ×P 2 ), and F 3 were harvested after the first five flowers opened and evaluated for PHL. Additionally, cut flowers from these lines were evaluated for leaf surface area. Populations for evaluation were grown in the greenhouse in winter and spring 1999-2000 in a randomized complete-block design according to standard forcing procedures. Twenty-five cut flowering stems of each genotype were held in the laboratory in deionized water under continuous fluorescent lighting at 22 °C for PHL assessment. The end of PHL was defined as 50% of the flowers drying, browning, or wilting. Data will be presented on the correlation between stomatal density and PHL.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.184 · 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.

Study designObservational
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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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