Effect of Sodium Chloride Salt on Germination, Growth, and Elemental Composition of Alfalfa Cultivars with Different Tolerances to Salinity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate physiological responses and elemental composition of three salt tolerant alfalfa (Medicagosativa L.) cultivars, ‘Halo’, ‘Bridgeview’, ‘Rugged’, and two intolerant cultivars ‘Rangelander’ and ‘Vernal’ under five salinity levels (0 dSm−1, 4 dSm−1, 8 dSm−1, 12 dSm−1 and 16 dSm−1) in a sand based hydroponic system in the greenhouse. The germination percentage among the cultivars was highest for ‘Halo’ under salt stress. ‘Rugged’ and ‘Halo’ had higher seed vigor than the other cultivars in 16 dSm−1 EC. Among the alfalfa cultivars, ‘Rugged’ had the highest chlorophyll content at 0–12 dSm−1 EC. There was variation for root (p = 0.01) and shoot (p = 0.03) biomass among the alfalfa cultivars. Salt stress reduced (p < 0.001) plant height and shoot biomass, with 4.2% and 7.9% reduction for each 1 dS m−1 increase, respectively. Shoot biomass showed a positive correlation with plant height (p < 0.001, r = 0.80), chlorophyll content (p < 0.001, r = 0.56), root biomass (p < 0.001, r = 0.51), but was not correlated with seed vigor. This study demonstrated that seed vigor in the germination stage can not be used to predict salt tolerance of alfalfa at mature growth stages, however plant height and leaf chlorophyll content can serve as physiological markers for high shoot biomass selection at mature growth stages under salt 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 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".