A HYDROPONIC APPROACH TO EVALUATE RESPONSES TO NUTRIENTS AND PHYTOHORMONES IN COTTON PLANTS (Gossypium hirsutum L.) GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cotton plant growth and development, as well as monitoring nutrient use efficiency were evaluated using hydroponic approach. Two set of experiments were conducted to determine the influence of phosphorus (P), potassium (K) and PK and exogenous application of Indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), gibberellic acid (GA3), zeatin (Z) and their combinations on growth and development of cotton plants (Gossypium hirsutum) grown hydroponically. In the nutrient solution experiment, cotton vegetative growth was positively influenced by low P (half strength Hoagland standard solution), low K (one-sixth strength Hoagland standard solution) and high PK treatments (Hoagland standard solution). Phytohormone experiment negatively supported vegetative growth except root length at 43 days after transplanting (DAT). The nutrients levels applied significantly favoured NPK uptake by cotton plants while exogenous phytohormones application did not affect NPK uptake by cotton plants, except N uptake by stem. Low P and low K treatments estimated to have high nutrient use efficiency (NUE). For chlorophyll formation, low K and high PK significantly increased formation of chlorophyll a, b and total ab while the application of GA3, IAA, Z and IAA x GA3 x 2Z treatments significantly increased chlorophyll a, b and total ab at 80 DAT only. Low K and low P treatments stimulated endogenous phytohormone contents in the cotton plants. In the phytohormone experiment, cotton plants treated to IAA x GA3 x Z increased endogenous phytohormone contents in the cotton plants. Low P, low K, high PK treatments and phytohormones treatments significantly increased root area, root volume and root activity. Low P, low K and high PK treatments applied significantly influenced residual level of P and K in the hydroponics while phytohormone treatments did not affect residual level of P and K except at 43 DAT. Evapotranspiration rate was high at early and reproductive stages of plant growth. This report shows the response of mineral nutrients and phytohormones to support growth and development of cotton plants grown hydroponically.
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".