MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040386435 · doi:10.1080/01904167.2020.1783300

Foliar feeding of boron improves the productivity of cotton cultivars with enhanced boll retention percentage

2020· article· en· W3040386435 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Ashfaq Wahid, Muhammad Farrukh Saleem, Sohail Irshad, Shahbaz Khan, Mumtaz Cheema, Shahbaz Atta Tung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plant Nutrition · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and Effects
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLintCultivarAgronomyYield (engineering)Fiber cropMalvaceaeBoronHorticultureBiologyBt cottonNutrientChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is of prime importance because of its quality fiber and edible oil production. Boron (B) is among essential micronutrients for plant growth; it aids in the transfer of sugars and nutrients from leaves to fruit that are involved directly or indirectly in many plant functions. Cotton growth, yield and quality are strongly affected with boron application. A two-year study was conducted to evaluate the impact of foliar applied B (0, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 g of B L−1 of water) on the performance of cotton cultivars (FH-113, MNH-786 and CIM-496). The results indicated that growth, yield and quality traits of cotton were significantly influenced by different levels of foliar applied boron as well as cultivars of cotton. Among cotton cultivars, the yield and quality parameters were superior in cultivar “FH-113.” Foliar application of boron at 6 g L−1 of water improved leaf area index and leaf area duration and eventually improved the number of bolls per plant, boll retention percentage, average boll weight, lint yield, ginning out turn, fiber length and uniformity ratio of cotton. Foliar application of B at 6 g per liter of water, showed promising results by improving growth and quality parameters and is recommend to enhance the economical yield production of cotton cultivar “FH-113” with improved quality.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plant NutritionSame topicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and EffectsFrench-language works237,207