Growth and Evaluation of Phenolic Compounds in Physalis angulata L. at Two Different Periods in the Bahia Reconcavo, Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physalis angulata L. has aroused the interest of the researchers, since its properties come from the great therapeutic potential attributed to the commonly called substances of physalins. However, its cultivation in the study region lacks important information on the species adaptation to local soil and climate characteristics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the growth and concentration of phenolic compounds in P. angulata L. at two different periods in the Bahia Reconcavo. The experimental design was completely randomized blocks with 10 replicates. We evaluated the stem height and diameter, number of leaves and fruits, dry mass of leaves, stems and roots, leaf area, specific leaf area, leaf area ratio, leaf mass ratio and total phenolics, total flavonoids and antioxidant activity in the different organs of the plant. The growth was favorable from April to June. However, the concentration of phenolic compounds was higher in the period from December to February. The cultivation period influenced the growth and concentration of phenolic compounds in P. angulata L. in the Bahia Reconcavo.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".