Growth response nitrogen metabolism of grafted cucumber fertilized with different ratios of nitrate: ammonium fertilizer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of an endemic plant as rootstock has many merits but its application for cucurbits production has not been extensively investigated. The present study determined the growth responses of grafted cucumber using two endemic rootstocks from Cucurbita pepo L. fertilized with different ratios of nitrate (NO3-): ammonium (NH4+) fertilizer. A greenhouse study was carried out using cucumber (C. sativus ‘Dominos’) grafted on two accessions of Cucurbita pepo L. collected from Babol and Isfahan with the control being ungrafted C. sativus ‘Dominos’. Different ratios of NO3-/NH4+ as follows: 100:0 (NO3− alone), 25/75, 50/50, 75/25 and 0/100 (NH4+ alone) were applied. It was found that different rootstock has the same physiology but different growth attributes. The growth of the ungrafted cucumber was lower than the grafted ones, and Babol showed better or equal growth compared to the Isfahan rootstock. The NO3-/NH4+ effect on growth of the cucumber shoot and root fresh and dry weights, root and shoot lengths, nodes, and number of leaves were increased in the 75/25 ratio compared to the other treatments. Grafting on the Isfahan and Babol showed the same effect of N metabolism i.e., grafting increased nitrate reductase activity and NO3- concentration in the 75/25 and the 100/0. Protein content and amino acids content of leaves increased in the grafted cucumber treated with 50/50 NO3-/NH4+. The same response of photosynthesis parameters was observed in the different rootstocks. In conclusion, the result suggested that the grafted ‘Dominos’ on Babol endemic rootstock at 50/50 NO3-/NH4+ ratio gave the high growth.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".