MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797646135 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2018.14.19

Efficacy of Extraction Methods of Moringa oleifera Leaf Extract for Enhanced Growth and Yield of Wheat

2018· article· en· W2797646135 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhammad Umer Chattha, İmran Khan, Muhammad Umair Hassan, Muhammad Bilal Chattha, Muhammad Nawaz, Asif Iqbal, Nazar Hussain Khan, Naveed Akhtar, Muhammad Usman, Mina Kharal, Muhammad Aman Ullah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMoringa oleifera research and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoringaSowingCropAgronomyYield (engineering)BiologyDry weightHorticultureLeaf area indexDilutionFood scienceMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A field study was conducted to assess effective method to get Moringa leaf extract, through its response on growth and yield traits of wheat. Extracts of whole or chopped and dry or fresh Moringa leaves were used exogenously i.e. pre-sowing seed soaking as well as water diluted solution based foliar spray application at tillering and booting stages. Significantly higher growth response in term of leaf area index, leaf area duration, and crop growth rate was observed when combination of 30 times diluted moringa leaf extract (MLE) was applied at both crop stages. Yield contributing traits of wheat such as fertile tillers, spikelet’s spikelet’s per spike, grains per spike, 1000 grain weight, biological and grain yields were recorded in significantly higher due to 30 times diluted fresh MLE followed by 20 times dilution of Moringa dried leaf powder (DLP). While, control treatment and hydro-priming showed at comparable results in the form of significantly lesser fertile tillers, grains per spike, 1000-grain weight and grain or biological yields. Conclusively, 30 times diluted MLE proved the best among the treatments combinations for improved wheat growth and yield however, the biochemical features responsible for such promotive response are yet to be investigated prior to dissemination of this technology to the farmer field.

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)0.002
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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicMoringa oleifera research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207