MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786562256 · doi:10.5539/jas.v10n3p197

The Effect of Different Substrates on the Growth of Enterolobium contortisiliquum

2018· article· en· W2786562256 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anamarija Batista, Carla Coelho Ferreira, Íres Paula de Andrade Miranda, Edelcílio Marques Barbosa, Thiago De Paula de Andrade Miranda

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGrowth and nutrition in plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReforestationContext (archaeology)SeedlingBiomass (ecology)FabaceaeBiologySubstrate (aquarium)AgronomyAgroforestryBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brazilian origin species Enterolobium contortisiliquum (Vell.) Morong (Fabaceae) is distributed from north to south of the country. The species is a pioneer and important in the manufacture of furniture, boats and canoes, and presents easy handling also being significant for degraded areas recovery programs. As a result, management plans are necessary for the survival of this species. In the context of reforestation and recovery of degraded areas, the production of seedlings of native forest species occurs in nurseries and the quality of these plants depends on several factors, among which, the composition of the substrates is a factor of great importance for having its physical, chemical and biological characteristics directly linked to the growth of the seedlings. The study was based on obtaining knowledge and potential applicability in seedling production, subjecting it to different substrates, in order to evaluate their growth in height, diameter, number of leaves and biomass. The behavior presented by the species suggests its potential for reforestation turned to production and conservationism, since it revealed tolerance to the various types of substrates and better results with the use of organic matter added to the substrate.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicGrowth and nutrition in plantsFrench-language works237,207