Saline Water, Pit Coating and Calcium Fertilization on Chlorophyll, Fluorescence, Gas Exchange and Production in Passion Fruit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In plants sensitive to salinity, such as passion fruit, irrigation with saline water can cause physiological disturbances and reduce fruit production, necessitating the use of cultural practices that mitigate saline stress. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of water salinity, pit coating with high-strength polyethylene film, and calcium fertilization on the physiological and productive aspects of passion fruit ‘BRS Gigante Amarelo’. The treatments were arranged in split plot in the scheme 2WS × (2LP × 5DC), corresponding to water salinity (0.3 and 4.0 dS m-1) as the main plot, side coating of pits (without and with) doses of calcium (0; 30; 60; 90 and 120 kg ha-1). During the flowering phase, we evaluated leaf chlorophyll indices, fluorescence kinetics, and gas exchange. The increase in calcium doses up to 60 kg ha-1 increased leaf chlorophyll and quantum efficiency. The stomata did not restrict gas exchange, but salinity resulted in reduced net photosynthesis and plant production. The lateral coating of the pits intensified the reduction in salinity-promoted production, while calcium mitigated the effects of the salts. Entisol cultivated with passion fruit should not be irrigated with saline water of 4.0 dS m-1; lateral pit coating is not advised. In an Entisol with an initial calcium level of 1.92 cmolc dm-3, the recommended application dose is 60 kg ha-1 for passion fruit cultivation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".