MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2416752894 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2016-0056

Dormancy, storability, and germination of seeds in <i>Magnolia punduana</i> (Magnoliaceae)

2016· article· en· W2416752894 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Viheno Iralu, Krishna Upadhaya

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSeed Germination and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity Grants Commission
KeywordsGerminationMagnoliaceaeDormancyBiologyStratification (seeds)Seed dormancyScarificationHorticultureBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnolia punduana Hk. f. &amp; Th. (syn. Michelia punduana) is a threatened tree species restricted to northeastern India. The seeds remain dormant for 6 months after dispersal. Seed development and breaking of dormancy was investigated in the present study. Physical treatments such as water (cold, hot, and boiling) and acid and manual scarification proved ineffective in breaking dormancy. Matured seeds had linear and underdeveloped embryos at the time of dispersal with an embryo to seed length (E:S) ratio of 0.13. Germinating seeds showed a significant increase in the embryo length with an E:S ratio of 0.36. Cold stratification (CS) at 5 °C effectively broke dormancy. The embryo grew significantly after CS, indicating the presence of “non-deep simple” morphophysiological dormancy (MPD). Application of GA 3 had a significant effect on germination and the lowest germination time with the shortest T 50 was observed in seeds treated with 3000 mg·L −1 GA 3 . KNO 3 did not have an influence on breaking dormancy except in combination with GA 3 , which increased the germination percentage significantly. CS for 90 days and GA 3 (3000 mg·L −1 ) at 25 °C resulted in optimum germination. In the test for viability, seeds stored at 5 °C showed highest viability of 66.66% after 180 days.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.217 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations20
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicSeed Germination and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207