Effect of Pyroligneous Acid on the Productivity and Nutritional Quality of Greenhouse Tomato
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pyroligneous acid (PA) is a reddish-brown liquid obtained through the condensation of smoke formed during biochar production. PA contains bioactive compounds that can be utilized in agriculture to improve plant productivity and quality of edible parts. In this study, we investigated the biostimulatory effect of varying concentrations of PA (i.e., 0%, 0.25%, 0.5%, 1%, and 2% PA/ddH2O (v/v)) application on tomato (Solanum lycopersicum ‘Scotia’) plant growth and fruit quality under greenhouse conditions. Plants treated with 0.25% PA exhibited a significantly (p < 0.001) higher sub-stomatal CO2 concentration and a comparable leaf transpiration rate and stomatal conductance. The total number of fruits was significantly (p < 0.005) increased by approximately 65.6% and 34.4% following the application of 0.5% and 0.25% PA, respectively, compared to the control. The 0.5% PA enhanced the total weight of fruits by approximately 25.5%, while the 0.25% PA increased the elemental composition of the fruits. However, the highest PA concentration of 2% significantly (p > 0.05) reduced plant growth and yield, but significantly (p < 0.001) enhanced tomato fruit juice Brix, electrical conductivity, total dissolved solids, and titratable acidity. Additionally, total phenolic and flavonoid contents were significantly (p < 0.001) increased by the 2% PA. However, the highest carotenoid content was obtained with the 0.5% and 1% PA treatments. Additionally, PA treatment of the tomato plants resulted in a significantly (p < 0.001) high total ascorbate content, but reduced fruit peroxidase activity compared to the control. These indicate that PA can potentially be used as a biostimulant for a higher yield and nutritional quality of tomato.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it