The influence of Rhizobium tropici produced EPM biopolymer on green bush bean root and plant growth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Rhizobium tropici (R. tropici) derived biopolymer has been reported as an effective, biodegradable, additive to reduce erosion. In addition to directly modifying the mechanical properties of the soil, it was postulated that indirectly it enhanced vegetation, which in turn stabilized the soil through enhanced root infrastructure. We therefore chose to study its impact directly on Green Bush Bean plants, where its effect could be measured in the early stages of plant development, starting from germination of the seeds through the initial growth of leaves and shoots. EPM derived from R. tropici bacteria ATCC (strain) grown in two laboratories were tested with similar results, indicating a high degree of reproducibility. Watering Bush Bean seeds with EPM concentrations as low as 50 and 100 mg/L produced a small increase of the germination rate, from 87% to 93% for seeds grown for ten days in a moist environment. The seeds were then transplanted into potting soil and allowed to grow for another three weeks, during which they were watered daily with tap water or the EPM solutions. Continued watering with EPM after transplantation showed enhancement in both root and stem/leaf mass three weeks after transplantation into potting soil by 45% for the two EPM biopolymers. Root density was also higher by 29% to 71% for EPM1.The mass of the leaf and shoots also showed a significant enhancement over the control, but in this case favoring EPM2, consistent with plants preferring either root or leaf production.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".