MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W289210398

Effect of inoculum placement of indigenous and introduced arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on mycorrhizal infection, growth, and dry matter in Phaseolus vulgaris.

2000· article· en· W289210398 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. A. R. Oliveira, F. E. Sanders

Bibliographic record

VenueTropical Agriculture · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhaseolusBiologyInoculationSowingShootArbuscular mycorrhizal fungiMycorrhizal fungiAgronomyDry weightMycorrhizaHorticultureDry matterBotanySymbiosisBacteria
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The experiment was conducted in a fumigated soil which had been cropped with cereals in the previous year. The five treatments were: introduced arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi-inoculum dispersed; introduced AM fungi-inoculum placed; indigenous AM fungi-inoculum dispersed; indigenous AM fungi-inoculum placed; and uninoculated. Phaseolus vulgaris cv. Canadian Wonder was sown in furrows of standard spacing. Plants were harvested on three occasions. Inoculation with both introduced and indigenous AM fungi improved the growth and yield of beans. These fungi increased leaf area and differences were mantained until the final harvest. The shoot dry weight was also consistently higher in inoculated than in the uninoculated plants. Mycorrhizal infection was greatest when inoculum was placed below seeds at planting than dispersed, although the differences at individual harvests were not significant.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTropical AgricultureSame topicPlant pathogens and resistance mechanismsFrench-language works237,207