Dry Matter and Macronutrient Accumulation in Digitaria insularis Biotypes Susceptible and Resistant to Glyphosate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herbicide resistant is associated with morphological, physiological and metabolic alterations in weeds. These alterations may reflect changes in the nutritional status of resistant plants and their growth it can be inferred in greater adaptability and competitive ability of the resistant biotypes. Thus, the objective of this research was to determine the dry matter and macronutrient accumulation and distribution by glyphosate-resistant and susceptible plants of Digitaria insularis (sourgrass), growing under mineral nutrition standard conditions. The experimental design was completely randomized, with eleven treatments and four replicates. The treatments consisted of evaluation periods at 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90, 105, 120, 135, 150 and 165 days after emergence (DAE). The average time for maximum theoretical accumulation (PtMax) and for inflection points of dry mass and macronutrient were lower for susceptible (133 DAE; 99 DAE) than for resistant biotype (141 DAE; 105 DAE). However, considering the average time obtained by susceptible, dry mass (g) and macronutrients (mg) accumulation was always higher for resistant biotype. The decreasing sequence of nutrient accumulation was similar for both sourgrass biotypes: K, N, Ca, Mg, P and S.
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) | 0.001 | 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".