MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212495366 · doi:10.36253/ahsc-10628

Effect of harvest time and fruit size on seed germination and seedlings growth of sour orange and Mexican lime under in vitro conditions

2021· article· en· W3212495366 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sakineh Jokari, Akhtar Shekafandeh

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Horticultural Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIslamic Azad University, Mashhad BranchCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaIslamic Azad University
KeywordsSeedlingOrange (colour)GerminationLimeBiologyHorticultureDry weightAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research was to determine the best time to harvest the fruits for seed production which would ultimately lead to the production of citrus rootstocks of optimum quality. The sour orange and Mexican lime fruits were harvested on 7 and 5 occasions, respectively. The very first fruits were harvested 80 days after flowering and subsequent harvests were gathered every 30 days. An in vitro experiment was carried out in a completely randomized design, with four replications and 20 seeds in each replication. Based on fruit growth curve the time of fruit harvest affected seed germination (percentage and rate) and seedling growth (stem and root length, fresh and dry weight of stems, roots and leaves). The results showed that the best time to harvest the fruits of sour orange and Mexican lime was 230 and 170 days after flowering, respectively, which led to maximum seed germination (Mexican lime 100% and sour orange 85%) and seedling growth. The highest root, stem and leaf fresh and dry weight was also obtained at 230 and 170 days after flowering in sour orange and Mexican lime respectively.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Horticultural ScienceSame topicPlant Physiology and Cultivation StudiesFrench-language works237,207