MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951402826 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n9p234

Effects of Nitrogen Fertilization and Water Replacement Level on the Production of Gladiolus Corms in a Protected Environment

2019· article· en· W2951402826 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Márcio Koetz, Rebeca de Andrade Porto, Edna Maria Bomfim-Silva, Analy Castilho Polyzel, Tonny José Araújo da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGrowth and nutrition in plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCormGladiolusRandomized block designNitrogenHuman fertilizationHorticultureWater qualityAnimal scienceAgronomyChemistryBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of water replacement levels (50, 75, 100, 125 and 150%; for the 100% level, the water replacement volume was at field capacity) and nitrogen doses (0, 30, 60, 90, and 120 mg dm-3) on the production of gladiolus (Gladiolus grandiflorus L.) corms, White Friendship variety. The project was developed in a protected environment using a randomized complete block design witha 5x5 factorial scheme (water replacement levels × nitrogen doses). The evaluated variables werecorm diameter and weight and cormel number and weight. The data were assed using analysis of variance F-test at 5% probability and a regression analysis using the Sisvar statistical program. There was no nitrogen fertilization effect on the analyzed variables. The water replacement levels had a significant effect. For corm weight, the water replacement level that led to the highest weight was 128.96%. The weight and number of cormels were fit using an increasing linear regression model. According to Brazilian commercial corm standards, quality corms with diameters that suggest good potential for floral stem production were observed starting at the 50% water replacement level.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.168 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicGrowth and nutrition in plantsFrench-language works237,207