MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195650124 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2020-0330

Seed germination responses to low-level narrow-band light spectra for 14 ornamental plant genotypes

2021· article· en· W3195650124 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Devdutt Kamath, Yun Kong, Chevonne Dayboll, Theo J. Blom, Youbin Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLight effects on plants
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsUniversity of Guelph
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsGerminationDarknessBiologyCatharanthus roseusOrnamental plantHorticultureGerberaBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate whether low-level lighting is necessary and which narrow-band light spectra are effective in seed germination, seeds of 14 genotypes from begonia (Begonia × tuberosa), echinacea (Echinacea spp.), gerbera (Gerbera jamesonii), petunia (Petunia × hybrida), and vinca (Catharanthus roseus) were germinated under ultraviolet-B (UVB), blue (B), green (G), red (R), far-red (FR) light, or darkness. Light-emitting diode (LED) fixtures provided all spectrum treatments except for UVB, which was provided by a narrow-band fluorescent light. The photon flux density at seed level was ≈18 μmol·m −2 ·s −1 for B, G, R, and FR, and 0.4 μmol·m −2 ·s −1 for UVB. Based on daily germination observations, final germination percentage, germination onset time, germination time spread, and germination speed were compared among different spectrum treatments for each of the plant genotypes. There were no promotive effects on final germination percentage, germination onset time, and germination time spread under the narrow-band lights compared with darkness. For all plant genotypes, B had a similar effect as darkness on seed germination. FR inhibited seed germination relative to darkness by reducing final germination percentage by 31%–88%, delaying germination onset time by 30%–40%, and decreasing germination speed by 11%–48% in some genotypes. Under R, G, and UVB compared with darkness, germination speed was promoted for begonia ‘Apricot Shade’, a light-requiring genotype, and inhibited for vinca ‘Burgundy’, a light-inhibited genotype. Therefore, lighting at low levels used in our study is unnecessary for seed germination of the tested species except light-requiring genotypes, where R, G, and UVB are the most promotive among the tested narrow-band lights.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicLight effects on plantsFrench-language works237,207