Gas Exchange in Tomato under Different Water Management in Cultivation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The water management in the tomato crop has a direct effect on the development and yield, however the gas exchange rates of the plant can be influenced by the management and evaluation period. The study aimed to analyze gas exchange in tomato, in full production, in plants cultivated under different water management. The experiment was conducted in a completely randomized design with two water conditions during cultivation (with deficit and without deficit). The management of the water deficit adopted using different depths of water replacement, under water deficit the replacement of 60% of the crop evapotranspiration (ETc) was carried out while in the condition without deficit there was replacement of 100% of the ETc. The determination of gas exchanges, in a period with full production, was performed at 70 and 71 days after transplanting, determining photosynthesis (A), stomatal conductance (Gs), internal CO2 (Ci) and transpiration (E). From the A/E ratio, the intrinsic water use efficiency (iWUE) was calculated. The data were submitted to analysis of variances and the means compared by the Tukey test with 5% of significance. There is significant variation in gas exchange rates depending on the water management adopted and evaluation period. Water deficit has a cumulative effect on plants. Tomato plants cultivated with water deficit (60% of ETc) have lower rates of gas exchange, with no full recovery of rates even after irrigation. Tomato plants grown without water deficit (100% of ETc) show adaptation and compensation in gas exchange due to soil drying.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".