Fruit Yield and Antioxidant Activity of Pepper Genotypes Subjected to Nitrogen Doses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study evaluates the fruit yield and antioxidant activity of pepper genotypes as a function of nitrogen doses. The experiment was conducted in a greenhouse with seven pepper genotypes: two C. annuum (116 and 163), two C. chinense (39 and 118), two C. frutescens (17 and 113), and one C. praetermissum (141), and 11 nitrogen doses (0, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256 and 512 N mg dm-3). Productive parameters were evaluated, and antioxidant compounds were determined by spectrophotometric methods. Genotypes 116 and 163 showed a higher fruit fresh mass, and genotype 141 produced the highest number of fruits per plant. Genotypes 141 and 163 were the earliest. The highest antioxidant activity was obtained in the extracts of fruits of genotype 113. Nitrogen fertilization did not affect the antioxidant content of fruits. The pepper genotypes of the present study have comparable bioactive compound contents and antioxidant activity. Therefore, they are promising genotypes for the vegetable production sector, with potential for industrial and pharmacological use.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".