MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136797012 · doi:10.3389/fpls.2021.595030

Transpiration Rate of White Clover (Trifolium repens L.) Cultivars in Drying Soil

2021· article· en· W3136797012 on OpenAlexaff
Lucy M. Egan, Rainer Hofmann, S. N. Nichols, Jonathan Hadipurnomo, Valerio Hoyos‐Villegas

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Plant Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAgResearch
KeywordsTranspirationCultivarTrifolium repensAgronomyWater contentHorticultureGreenhouseStolonSoil waterBiologyChemistryPhotosynthesisBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining the performance of white clover cultivars under drought conditions is critical in dry climates. However, comparing the differences in cultivar performance requires equivalent soil water content for all plants, to reduce the water deficit threshold eliciting stomatal closure. In this study, the objective was to compare the rate of stomatal closure in eighty white clover cultivars in response to soil drying. Two glasshouse experiments were conducted, and the daily transpiration rate was measured by weighing each pot. The transpiration rate of the drought-stressed plants were normalized against the control plants to minimize effects from transpiration fluctuations and was recorded as the normalized transpiration rate (NTR). The daily soil water content was expressed as the fraction of transpirable soil water (FTSW). The FTSW threshold (FTSWc) was estimated after which the NTR decreases linearly. The FTSWc marks the critical point where the stomata start to close, and transpiration decreases linearly. The significant difference (p < 0.05) between the 10 cultivars with the highest and lowest FTSWc demonstrates the cultivars would perform better in short- or long-term droughts.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Plant ScienceSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207