Effect of Centaurea pullata Methanolic Extract on the Growth of Portulaca oleracea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phytotoxicity or allelopathy means poisonous results by a composite onplantgrowth, composites may be trace metals, pesticides salinity or phytotoxins. Some of the medicinal plants have phytotoxic activities which inhibit the growth of weeds and unwanted plants which are not of our desire. The present study is aimed to investigate the phytotoxic assessment of Centaurea pullata methanolic extract (CPME) roots. Dried plant were ground and extracted with methanol to prepare methanol crude extract. In-vitro phytotoxicity activity was conducted using these methanolic extracts as per standard procedures. The inhibitory effect of Centaurea pullata extract is tested on stalk and root of Portulaca oleracea and using four concentrations (3, 1.5, 0.75 and 0.37mg/ml) of plant extract and distal water in control. The result is noted on 5th and 10th days. The results obtained from these experiments showed that the crude methanolic extract of Centaurea pullata slightly inhibits the roots and shoots of Portulaca oleracea seeds as compared to the control plate which was not treated by the above mentioned sample extracts shown in Figures as. From the results obtained that, Phytotoxicity activity of Centaurea pullata methanolic extract showed non-significant results. Purification and in vivo studies of these plant are required for further verification.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".