MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4297339114 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2022-0061

Hydroponic production of fireweed for biomass and phytochemicals

2022· article· en· W4297339114 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katrina Freund Saxhaug, Jacob M. Jungers, Donald L. Wyse, Craig C. Sheaffer, Adrian D. Hegeman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNutrientPhytochemicalHydroponicsBiomass (ecology)ShootBiologyPlant physiologyMetabolomicsBotanyHorticultureAgronomyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fireweed ( Chamerion angustifolium (L.) Holub.) is utilized worldwide in traditional medicine, due to its high levels of phenolic compounds that possess bioactive properties with a wide range of therapeutic effects on human health. However, there is little work on the direct production of fireweed for these beneficial phytochemicals. To examine the effects of nutrient availability on fireweed biomass production and metabolomic profile, fireweed plants were grown in a hydroponic greenhouse system with varying concentrations of Hoagland’s nutrient solution. As the concentration of the nutrient solution increased, shoot dry mass increased, and root:shoot ratio decreased. Variation in untargeted metabolomic profiles were detected in leaf, stem, and root tissues of hydroponically produced fireweed in response to nutrient level. Several metabolic features were identified, most notably the therapeutic compounds oenothein B and miquelianin. Relative abundances of oenothein B and miquelianin were largely unaffected by nutrient treatments, while several other phytochemicals increased in abundance as nutrient content decreased. This work demonstrates the potentiality of hydroponically cultivated fireweed to supply raw material for phytochemical demand, but the effects of mineral nutrient amendment must first be reconciled with biomass production.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant Science→Same topicPlant tissue culture and regeneration→French-language works237,207→