MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904795747 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n1p209

Establishing Irrigation Levels Targeting Higher Content of Lycopene and Water Use Efficiency in Tomato

2018· article· en· W2904795747 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fábio Teixeira Delazari, Ronaldo Silva Gomes, Bruno Soares Laurindo, Renata Dias Freitas Laurindo, Luan Brioschi Giovanelli, Davi Soares de Freitas, Everardo Chartuni Mantovani, Derly José Henriques da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIrrigation Practices and Water Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLycopeneIrrigationWater-use efficiencyProductivityCroppingEnvironmental scienceSustainabilityDeficit irrigationCarotenoidAgronomyBiotechnologyAgricultural engineeringIrrigation managementBiologyAgricultureFood scienceEngineeringEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The demand for healthier foods has been increasing worldwide. Associated with this trend, it is crucial to optimize the use of inputs for ensuring the sustainability of production. The fruits of tomato are important sources of minerals, vitamins, and especially of carotenoids such as the lycopene. This carotenoid plays biological activities that are crucial such as the antioxidant function, besides its proven action in the prevention of cancers and degenerative diseases. The irrigation seems to play a fundamental role in the biosynthesis of lycopene. Thus, it is fundamental to establish levels of irrigation that might provide higher content of lycopene, productivity, and efficiency in the use of water in the production of tomato. The objective of this study was to establish adequate levels of irrigation for the obtainment of higher content of lycopene, productivity of fruits, and higher efficiency in the use of water in the production of salad tomato. For this, two experiments were carried in different cropping seasons. The treatments consisted of the application of four irrigation depths, corresponding to 50, 100, 150 and 200% of the tomato evapotranspiration. The estimates of maximum productivity corresponded to the application of the irrigation depth of 112% ETc, while the maximum content of lycopene and the higher efficiency in the use of water corresponded to 50% ETc. The irrigation depth of 100% ETc is recommended as the best irrigation depth to obtain higher content of lycopene, productivity, and efficiency in the use of water jointly.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicIrrigation Practices and Water ManagementFrench-language works237,207