MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786432409 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2017-0289

Effects of gibberellic acid and magnetically treated water on physiological characteristics of <i>Tilia miqueliana</i> seeds

2018· article· en· W2786432409 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wenfei Yao, Yongbao Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMagnetic and Electromagnetic Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsGibberellic acidTiliaHorticultureBotanyBiologyChemistryGermination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cold stratification of Tilia miqueliana M. seeds with different pretreatments of gibberellic acid (GA3) and (or) magnetically treated water (MTW) to break the dormancy and obtain higher and more uniform germination has been studied well. However, there is no complete and uniform theory explaining the effects of MTW or the interaction between MTW and GA3 on seed germination and dormancy breaking. During cold stratification, nutritional contents of soluble sugar, soluble protein, and starch and enzyme activities of α-amylase and protease were evaluated and showed significant changes in treated seeds. The MTW–GA3 treatment produced the biggest changes. For seeds treated with MTW–GA3, soluble sugar content reached the maximum value and protein and starch contents suffered the largest decline after 30 days of cold stratification. The maximum values of α-amylase and protease activities were both observed in seeds treated with MTW–GA3, and they were 216.67% and 67.58% higher, respectively, than corresponding control values. These changes in treated seeds could be triggering the fast germination and dormancy breaking.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.263
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicMagnetic and Electromagnetic EffectsFrench-language works237,207