MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507138120 · doi:10.21273/hortsci.51.7.910

Cranberry Gas Exchange under Short-term Hypoxic Soil Conditions

2016· article· en· W2507138120 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Pelletier, Steeve Pépin, Thomas H. Laurent, Jacques Gallichand, Jean Caron

Bibliographic record

VenueHortScience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant responses to water stress
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaterlogging (archaeology)PhotosynthesisStomatal conductanceAgronomyElongationHorticultureBiologyChemistryBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cranberries were grown under controlled environmental conditions to determine the effects of soil waterlogging on cranberry gas exchange in three growth stages and to investigate the recovery time after waterlogging. Photosynthesis declined by 28% after the first day of waterlogging at the bud elongation stage and was 46% lower after the fifth day. At the flowering stage, the reduction in photosynthesis started to be significant only after the fifth day, whereas no reduction was observed at the fruit development stage. Stomatal limitations were responsible, in part, for the observed decrease in photosynthesis since stomatal conductance ( g S ) declined by 68% and 45% after the fifth day of waterlogging during bud elongation and flowering, respectively. After water drained away in the saturated treatments, leaf photosynthesis remained lower than in the unsaturated control treatment for 1 to more than 10 days at the bud elongation stage. Our results demonstrate that short-term hypoxic soil conditions can alter cranberry gas exchange depending on plant growth stage, and suggest that adequate drainage or control of the water table depth is required to avoid the negative effects of soil waterlogging on cranberry yield.

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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHortScienceSame topicPlant responses to water stressFrench-language works237,207