Sowing Depth on Emergence of Different Safflower Genotypes (Carthamus tinctorius L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective is to evaluate the germination of four different safflower genotypes at six sowing depths. The study was carried out in the experimental field of the Western Paraná State University, in Cascavel, in two stages: in protected environment and in the field. In a protected environment, the experimental units were vessels with a 0.10 m diameter and a 0.20 m height, maintaining a 0.05 m water level. Using 10 seeds per vase, filled with substrate composed of vermiculite and macronutrients. For the field, the experimental units were divided in 3 blocks with 1.50 m rows, with 30 seeds spaced in 0.05 m, spacing between 0.30 m rows, totalizing blocks of 6 m by 1.8 m. For the analysis, we performed a 5 × 4 factorial, with four replicates being 5 depths (0.02; 0.04; 0.06; 0.08 and 0.10 m) and 4 genotypes, with analysis of percentage, speed index, mean time and average speed of emergence and morphometric characteristics of the plant. High emergence rates occurred for the lowest sowing depths, ranging from 60 to 80%. At the greatest depths, the averages were below 50%. At 0 m depth, there was no emergence for both sites. For the emergence speed index, the averages ranged from 0.47 to 1.34 seeds per day for the protected environment and 2.26 to 16.42 seeds per day for the field experiment. For both sites, the IMA-2103 genotype had the best performance for the evaluated indices. The depths indicated for planting are 2 and 4 cm.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".