MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225919425 · doi:10.3390/iecps2021-12052

Effects of Alkalinity-Induced Iron Deficiency on Physiological and Growth Variables of Some Upland Rice Cultivars under Laboratory Condition

2021· article· en· W4225919425 on OpenAlexaff
Olayinka Oyedeji, Olalekan Suleiman Sakariyawo, Kehinde A. Adeboye, Mamadou Fofana, Oludayo Daniel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIron deficiencyAlkalinityCultivarPhotosynthesisHydroponicsSeedlingAgronomyBiologyUpland ricePhotosynthetic efficiencyHorticultureOryza sativaChemistryBotanyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prevalence of iron deficiency in upland rice under alkalinity stress is capable of constraining its production. This investigation aimed to explicate the physiological basis of iron deficiency tolerance in some upland rice genotypes. Eighty upland rice genotypes were characterized for iron deficiency tolerance at seedling growth stage in sand-culture hydroponics with varying NaHCO3 concentrations (0, 15 and 25 mM). The treatments were arranged in a completely randomised design with three replicates. A significant decrease was observed on leaf iron concentration, SPAD meter readings, leaf photosynthetic efficiency, quantum yield and growth variables with increasing concentration of NaHCO3. The iron tolerance index was further estimated based on these parameters and used for ranking the genotypes. Based on iron tolerance index, genotypes were divided into six groups, with Caipo and NERICA 7 identified as the most and least tolerant to iron deficiency, respectively. The basis of iron deficiency tolerance is discussed in relation to the stability of the photosynthetic apparatus and the plan growth under alkalinity stress.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and EffectsFrench-language works237,207