MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391324435 · doi:10.3390/horticulturae10020126

Influence of Hydroponics Nutrient Solution on Quality of Selected Varieties of Potato Minitubers

2024· article· en· W4391324435 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Winnie Chebet Wambugu, A.M. Kibe, Arnold M. Opiyo, Stephen Kironji Githeng’u, Thomas Odong

Bibliographic record

VenueHorticulturae · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPotato Plant Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMastercard Foundation
KeywordsHydroponicsNutrientGreenhouseAgronomyHorticultureDry matterSugarMathematicsBiologyFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Addressing poor seed quality is pivotal for increased potato yields in Kenya. For this to be realized there is a need for nutrient optimization in the hydroponic system. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of nutrient stock solution concentrations on the quality of minitubers produced under a hydroponic system. Two greenhouse experiments were set up at Egerton University, Kenya in 2022. The treatments included three nutrient solution concentrations: 75% (N75), 100% (N100) and 125% (N125) and four potato varieties (Wanjiku, Unica, Shangi and Nyota) grown in a cocopeat substrate hydroponic system. The results indicated that the application of N125 produced minitubers that had significantly higher specific gravity, dry matter, starch, ash and sugar content. Crude protein and phosphorus did not differ significantly with the application of varying nutrient concentrations. The varieties did not differ significantly in the quality parameters except for total sugars where Unica was significantly different from Nyota and Wanjiku while Shangi did not differ from all varieties. Therefore, it will be advisable to apply 125% of the ADC-Molo recommended nutrient stock formulation which should be considered as an effective method of increasing minitubers quality under a hydroponic system.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHorticulturaeSame topicPotato Plant ResearchFrench-language works237,207