Respuesta fisiológica y agronómica del pimiento (Capsicum annuum L.) cv. Labrador a la aplicación de bioestimulantes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The work was carried out in the Basic State Unit of “La Pupa” cultivation houses, in the province of Granma, Cuba, on a Fluvisol soil in the period September-December 2021. The objective was to evaluate the effect of three bioproducts on the crop. of the Labrador variety pepper. Four treatments were formed, each with 112 plants and four repetitions, in a completely randomized experimental design. Treatment 1: Application of Pyroligneous Acid, Treatment 2: Application of Quitomax®; Treatment 3: Application of Pectimorf®, 4.-Control treatment. The physiological variables fluorescence of origin (Fo), maximum fluorescence (Fm), the ratio of variable fluorescence and maximum fluorescence (Fv/Fm) and the time to reach the maximum fluorescence intensity were evaluated: in addition to the reproductive variables: number of flowers , number of fruits per plant, fruit length, fruit width, fruit mass and the yield was also calculated. An analysis of variance and comparison of means was applied to the data collected using the Tukey test at a 5% probability of error. The best result was obtained when applying Pyroligneous Acid, followed by Quitomax® and Pectimorf® with averages of 9.47, 9.1 and 8.57 kg m-2, respectively.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".