MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770858994 · doi:10.5539/jas.v9n12p316

Gas Exchanges of Yellow Capsicum Fertilized with Yellow Water and Cassava Wastewater

2017· article· en· W2770858994 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jailton Garcia Ramos, Vera Lúcia Antunes de Lima, Ronaldo do Nascimento, Rafaela Félix Basílio Guimarães, Mariana de Oliveira Pereira, Narcísio Cabral de Araújo, Daniele Ferreira de Melo, Sabrina Cordeiro de Lima

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Reuse
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWastewaterTranspirationEnvironmental scienceCompletely randomized designManureRandomized block designStomatal conductanceBiofertilizerTransplantingSewage treatmentHorticultureAgronomyEnvironmental engineeringPhotosynthesisBotanyBiologySeedling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wastewater reuse has increasingly become a sustainable alternative to the efficient use of water as well as the mitigation of the negative environmental impacts generated by the release of the water to the environment in an indiscriminate way. Thus, it is very important to know and evaluate the physiological variables of gas exchanges of plants cultivated with these waters, in order to obtain precise answers their effects on plant physiology. The present study aimed to evaluate the gas exchange of yellow capsicum cultivated in soil fertilized with human urine and cassava wastewater. The experiment was conducted in a protected environment at the Federal University of Campina Grande, Campina Grande - PB. A completely randomized design with eight treatments and five replications was used. The treatments were cattle manure (T1); NPK (T2); human urine treated (T3); cassava wastewater (T4); (T3)+(T4); 2x(T3); 2x(T4); 2x(T3+T4). The volumes of the biofertilizers were defined according to the nitrogen and potassium contents of urine and cassava wastewater, respectively. At 15 and 30 days after transplanting, the variables of gas exchange, the efficient use of water and the instantaneous efficacy of carboxylation were evaluated. The data were submitted to Tukey test at 5% probability. The results indicated that there wasn’t statistical difference for efficient use of water (UEA) evaluated at 30 DAT.The treatment 5 provided the best results in relation to gas exchange, for the variables internal concentration of CO2 (Ci), net assimilation rates of CO2 (A), stomatal conductance (gs), leaf transpiration (E), higher efficiency of water use (UEA) and instantaneous carboxylation efficiency at 15 DAT, so for 30 DAT the biofertilizer that provided the best results was the T4 treatment, although there weren’t significant statistical differences among the treatments for (UEA), except for of T5.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicWastewater Treatment and ReuseFrench-language works237,207