Growth of Eucalyptus urocam Under Different Irrigation Managements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the present study was to evaluate the effects of different water irrigation managements on the growth of Eucalyptus urocam plants. The experiment was conducted in a greenhouse at the Goiás State University, Ipameri campus, Brazil, using 100-day-old Eucalyptus urocam seedlings, which were transplanted into pots with 5 kg of substrate. A completely randomized experimental design with five replications was used, in a 2 × 4 factorial arrangement consisting of two daily irrigation depths (50%, and 100% of the substrate retention capacity) and four irrigation times (7:30 a.m., 11:30 a.m., 4:30 p.m., and 7:00 p.m.). The treatments were applied when the plants were 120 days old, and last 18 days, then, the variables were analyzed. E. urocam plants subjected to water deficit had high stomatal sensitivity, reduced transpiration rate, and maintained hydration, which are characteristics of isohydric plants. E. urocam plants irrigated at 4:30 p.m. or 7:00 p.m. presented low stomatal sensitivity and high biomass accumulation potential. Therefore, irrigations between 4:30 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. are recommended for Eucalyptus urocam plants at the initial growth stage.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".