MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401409683 · doi:10.1139/cjm-2024-0071

Lettuce seed pelleting with <i>Pseudomonas</i> sp. 31-12: plant growth promotion under laboratory and greenhouse conditions

2024· article· en· W4401409683 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Jakkrapong Kangsopa, R. A. Hynes, Boonmee Siri

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNematode management and characterization studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsPseudomonasLactucaBiologyGerminationPopulationHorticultureRhizosphereInoculationSeed treatmentGreenhouseAgronomyBotanyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant growth promotion by Pseudomonas sp. 31-12 incorporated into a lettuce seed pelleting matrix was studied. We examined (1) the effect of five rhizosphere derived bacterial strains on green oak lettuce ( Lactuca sativa L.) seed germination, root and shoot growth, as a strain selection step for seed coating and seed pelletizing studies, (2) population stability of Pseudomonas sp. 31-12 incorporated into a pelleting matrix on lettuce seed stored three months at 4 °C, and (3) lettuce growth promotion in the laboratory and greenhouse by Pseudomonas sp. 31-12 coated and pelletized seed. A spontaneous streptomycin mutant of Pseudomonas sp. 31-12 (str) was used to determine population size on seed and roots of 15- and 30-day-old lettuce. The population of Pseudomonas sp. 31-12str on coated and pelleted seed decreased from 10 4 cfu/seed to 10 3 cfu/seed after 3 months storage at 4 °C. However, the population exceeded 10 4 cfu/g root dry mass and 10 5 /g root dry mass after 15 days and 30 days in the greenhouse. Leaf fresh mass was significantly increased ( P ≤ 0.05) with Pseudomonas sp. 31-12 seed treatment as compared to noninoculated seed. In conclusion, pelletized lettuce seed with Pseudomonas sp. 31-12 promoted growth and yield in the greenhouse.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicNematode management and characterization studiesFrench-language works237,207