MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303696873 · doi:10.5539/jas.v14n11p1

Effects of Shading on Anatomical Aspects and Chlorophyll and Carotenoid Contents in Paricá

2022· article· en· W4303696873 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ana B. R. dos Santos, Heráclito E. O. da Conceição, José D. N. Alves, Jorge Alberto Gazel Yared, Alba L. F. de A. Lins, Michel Sauma Filho, Tayssa M. Franco, José P. de Araújo Neto, Priscila M. Silva, Ana P. S. Vieira, Andressa M. Bezerra, ayane da S. Souza

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGrowth and nutrition in plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShadingTrichomeCarotenoidBiologyChlorophyllPhotosynthesisBotanyChlorophyll aRandomized block designHorticultureEpidermis (zoology)SowingStomatal densityAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paricá (Schizolobium parahyba variety amazonicum) is an important species for reforestation programs in the Amazon; nevertheless, the anatomical and physiological parameters of the seedlings of this species under shading are not yet fully understood. This study evaluated the chlorophyll and carotenoid contents, the stomatal structure, and the stomatal position in the leaf epidermis under shading of paricá seedlings. The experiment comprised a randomized block design in a subdivided plot scheme, with two sources (Belterra and Urupá) and different shading levels (full sun, 30%, 50%, and 70%). At 100 days after sowing, we performed the analyses of photosynthetic pigment concentration and leaf anatomy. We found that the leaf is hypoestomatic with paracitic stomata and unicellular filiform trichomes on both sides. Higher levels of shading increased the contents of chlorophyll a and b and reduced the stomata density and carotenoid contents in the leaves of young paricá, showing that paricá has phenotypic plasticity to shading.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designObservational
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 venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicGrowth and nutrition in plantsFrench-language works237,207