Growth Promotion of Raphanus Sativus L. under Doses of Nitrogen with Application of Trichoderma Spp.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radishes are excellent sources of nutrients, such as antioxidants that benefit the immune system, dietary fibers that aid digestion, and vitamins that help control blood pressure and cardiovascular health. Despite this nutritional composition and rapid vegetative cycle, radishes still need to be consumed more and are understudied in Brazil. Another challenge is the limited knowledge about fungi of the Trichoderma spp. genus and their combination with fertilizers. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the growth promotion of Raphanus sativus L. under nitrogen doses combined with applying Trichoderma spp. isolates and their promoting effect on radish development. The experimental design used was a randomized complete block design in a 4 x 5 factorial scheme (isolates and doses), with seven replications, conducted in a greenhouse. The Trichoderma treatments were T1 – control without isolates application, T2 – ESALQ 1306, T3 – IBLF 006 WP, and T4 – URM 5911, and the nitrogen doses were 0, 50, 100, 150, 200, and 250 kg ha-1 of urea. The use of Trichoderma spp. demonstrates a positive effect on radish development, offering possibilities for promotion with an emphasis on lower doses of nitrogen. The ESALQ 1306 isolate (T. harzianum), at a dose of approximately 113 kg ha-1 of urea, a promotion was of 11% tuberous root diameter, 6% for the tuber root length, 50% for the leaf dry mass, 35% for the tuberous roots fresh mass, and 63% for the tuberous roots dry mass). The T. harzianum IBLF 006 WP and T. asperellum URM 5911 isolates are not recommended, as they presented an antagonistic effect.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".