Biomass, Protein Content and Cell Damage in Tanzania Grass Irrigated With Saline Water
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The scarcity of good water quality in semiarid region, combined with the high cost of pumping, has been the main limiting factor for increasing the irrigated area. The use of saline water for irrigation is a very common in semiarid zones, which can result in the soil salinization if irrigation management is not appropriated. To evaluate the biomass production, biochemical components and water consumption of Tanzania grass (Panicum maximum) irrigated with water salinity (1.5, 3.0, 4.5 and 6.0 dS m-1) an experiment in greenhouse was carried out in the Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido, Mossoró, Rio Grande do Norte State, Brazil. The variables dry matter, crude protein, ashes, cellular damage on leaves and consume water in the first and second cut of the grass were analyzed under completely randomized design with five treatments and six replications. Salinity water up to 6.0 dS m-1 can be used for irrigation of Tanzania grass plants, with small yield losses. Increased salinity reduces water consumption and increases the water use efficiency of Tanzania grass. Tanzania grass plants have increased protein content when subjected to saline stress, which is a mechanism of action to osmotic adjustment and allows the reduction of plant leaf damage in the second cycle.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it