Seasonal Variation of Chlorophyll and Carotenoids in Leaves of Hancornia speciosa in Three Central Areas of the Cerrado of the State of Tocantins, Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the seasonal variation in concentrations of chlorophyll a, b, total chlorophyll and carotenoids in leaves of Hancornia speciosa, Gomes, during the periods of the year, relating them to the main phenological events, periods (rainy, dry and transitions) and populations evaluated. The survey was performed in three sites and the spatio-temporal analysis divided into four periods (rainy, rainy-drytransition, dry and dry-rainy transition), with 10 replicates (matrix plants). The data were collected in average intervals of 33 days from October 2014 to April 2017. The extraction and calculation of the chlorophyll and carotenoid contents of the leaves were expressed in mg/g DM, according to the equations of Arnon (1949) and Lichtenthaler (1987). There was a significant difference between the periods and sites analyzed for all pigments and their relationships. There was a greater amount of chlorophyll a than chlorophyll b; this difference was greater in the dry period. In the rainy period, we found a greater amount of total chlorophyll, carotenoids and total chlorophyll/carotenoid ratio. The behavior for the species follows that already observed for deciduous plants, closely related to water availability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".