Physiological and Morphological Responses of Jatobá Submitted to Weed Competition and Glyphosate Doses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The jatobá (Hymenaea courbaril L.) occurring throughout Central America and tropical countries in South America. This specie has great potential timber, in addition to fruits, leaves and bark with medicinal properties. This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of weed competition and intoxication by glyphosate in jatobá plants. The experiment was carried out with jatobá plants in field. Eleven months after planting it was held a floristic inventory in the area. One month after thisfloristic inventory, it was installed an experimental design with six randomized blocks and six treatments: manual weeding of weeds; no manual weeding or herbicide; and four glyphosate doses, 1.25, 2.5, 3.75 and 5.00 L ha-1. At 15, 30, 45, 60 and 90 days after tratment it was carried out a photochemical efficiency analysis of photosystem II, chlorophyll indices, number of leaflets, height and stem diameter of the plants. Based on physiological variables (F0, Fm, Fv/Fm and ETR), the jatobá plants recovered 60 days after treatments. Although the jatobá plants are tolerant to glyphosate and weed competition, jatobá plants under 1.25 and 2.50 L ha-1 of glyphosate reduces the increase in height around 50%, plants under 3.75 and 5.00 L ha-1 reduces around 90% and plants under weed competition around 70%.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".