Allelopathic Effects of Caffeic Acid and Its Derivatives on Seed Germination and Growth Competitiveness of Native Plants (Lantana indica) and Invasive Plants (Solidago canadensis)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Allelopathy has garnered considerable attention, but the effects of different allelochemicals on invasive plants remain unclear. This study addressed the knowledge gap surrounding allelopathy and its impact on native and invasive plant species. We focused on the impact of caffeic acid and its derivatives on the growth and competitiveness of the native Lantana indica and the invasive plant Solidago canadensis. We selected three allelochemicals, caffeic acid, methyl caffeic acid, and ethyl caffeic acid, for evaluation at two concentrations (0.1 mM and 1.0 mM). Three planting methods were employed: (1) a single species of S. canadensis, (2) a single species of L. indica, and (3) a combination of S. canadensis and L. indica. In addition, a control group was also included. Results revealed that high concentrations (1 mM) of methyl caffeate (MC) and ethyl caffeate (EC) significantly reduced seed germination rate, seed germination index, and seed germination speed index of L. indica compared to a low concentration (0.1 mM). Plant height, stem diameter, biomass, and root length in the control group (CK) of S. canadensis were significantly higher than those in the treated groups. However, with increasing allelochemical concentration, L. indica’s relative competitiveness gradually decreased. These findings provide insights into the concentration-dependent effects of allelopathic compounds on the growth of L. indica and S. canadensis. By analyzing how these allelochemicals influence the growth and competitiveness of native and invasive plants, the study sheds light on the dynamics of allelochemical interactions between these species. This knowledge can be pivotal for understanding plant competition dynamics in ecosystems and could inform strategies to control invasive species or promote native plant growth.
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".