Jasmonic Acid and K-Phosphite Enhance Productivity and Technological Quality of Sugarcane Crop
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plant resistance inducers are cost-effective and environmentally pleasing strategies of plant protection to mitigate biotic and abiotic agents threatening food safety and energy security. We, accordingly, present jasmonic acid and k-phosphite as low-cost strategies to enhance productive yield and technological quality of sugarcane crop. Exogenously treatment of the sugarcane variety ‘SP81-3250’ consisted of carrying out foliar application of jasmonic acid at 1, 1.5 and 2 ml L-1 and K-phosphite at 2, 4 and 6 ml L-1 before crop flowering. Interestingly, both systemic phytorregulator and foliar fertilizer at the lowest doses significantly improved contents of total soluble solids and sucrose, as well as productive yield of fermentable sugars. Jasmonic acid could promote growth and development by triggering either non-enzymatic or enzymatic mechanisms in the host self-defense system to support of external stresses, including herbivory by sugarcane-borer. K-phosphite could improve crop performance by not only releasing water-soluble inorganic ions like phosphorus and potash, but also by signaling synthesis of phytoalexins. Purity of cane juice and productivity of stalks sharply decreased, as the doses of the plant-resistance inducers increased. Jasmonic acid and k-phosphite at unbalanced endogenous levels could inhibit physiological ripening and specific enzymatical activity of alkaline invertases and sucrose-phosphate synthase, thereby influencing bioavailability of sucrose. The lower the sucrose content, the poorer the technological quality of sugarcane crop. The conclusion is, therefore, jasmonic acid and K-phosphite at lower doses prove to be effective induced resistance techniques to produce richer feedstock, with potential to produce ethanol fuel and refined sugar in sugar-energy plants.
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".