Interpopulation variation in germination responses of Scotch thistle, <i>Onopordum acanthium</i> L., to various concentrations of GA<sub>3</sub>, KNO<sub>3</sub>, and NaHCO<sub>3</sub>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of GA3, KNO3, and NaHCO3 on germination percentages and rates were determined for cypselas (seeds) of four local populations of Scotch thistle, Onopordum acanthium L., collected during a 2-year period. Three (1996, stored cypselas) and four (1997, fresh cypselas) concentrations (0.025, 0.05, and 0.1% for both years, plus 0.0125% for 1997) of the three compounds were used. Both freshly collected cypselas and those stored for 67 days at room temperature exhibited a range of germination responses from readily germinable to strongly dormant. GA3, even at a very low concentration, caused most viable cypselas to germinate, but 5-6% of viable cypselas in two populations did not respond to any GA3 treatment. In general, dry-stored cypselas germinated faster than fresh ones. Populations with more germinability (= proportion of cypselas capable of germinating) responded faster to GA3 than those with less germinability. KNO3 usually increased germination percentages but reduced the rate of germination. When treated with KNO3, stored cypselas from the two populations with less germinability germinated more slowly than those of the other two. In general, germination percentage decreased with an increase in NaHCO3 concentration. Overall, stored cypselas that were treated with NaHCO3 germinated more slowly than those in the control. The large differences among four local populations in response to these chemicals suggest that the effects of germination stimulators and other chemicals should be observed on several populations per species.Key words: cypsela, germination promoters, germination inhibitors, local populations, Onopordum acanthium, Scotch thistle.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".