Emergence and growth of huacle chili seedlings (Capsicum annuum L.) with the use of biological formulations in commercial plot soil.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the effect of biological control agents (BCA) and two biological formulations (Bio-Terra and Bio-CNPR) against the phytopathogens found in the soil of huacle chili (Capsicum annuum) plantations, in order to obtain healthy seedlings. Design/Methodology/Approach: The following design variables were evaluated: germination (%), disease incidence (%), and survival (%). Stem height and root length were also evaluated. The experimental unit was a tray with n=30 seedlings per each treatments (T0, T1, T2, T3, and T4) and four repetitions. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used. Tukey’s mean test was applied (using the Minitab Statistical program version 20.0) in units that presented differences (p≤0.05). Results: The phytopathogenic microorganism Fusarium spp. was isolated from the soil of the plots cultivated with huacle chili. The T1 treatment recorded the best inhibitory effect against Fusarium spp.: it had 92.2% germination, 18.3% incidence of Fusarium spp., and 82% surviving seedlings (with an average height of 16 cm and a root length of 7.9 cm). The sterilization of the soil lead to T4 having the best results in germination, incidence, and survival, since Fusarium spp. did not damage huacle chili seedlings. In contrast, T0 did not prosper neither with BCA nor with biological products, since all the seedlings in non-sterile soil died. Study Limitations/Implications: A plastic barrier was placed between the trays with the chili seedlings to avoid cross-contamination between treatments. Findings/Conclusions: T1 (the BCA with nitrogen-fixing bacteria and B. subtilis) recorded the best counteracting results against the damage generated by Fusarium spp. Their antagonism allowed a high percentage of survival of huacle chili seedlings and encouraged plant development through the best root growth and height of the seedlings.
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) | 0.001 | 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".