Developmental Stages of Bell Pepper Influence the Response to Far-Red Light Supplements in a Controlled Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Far-red (FR) additions to white or red/blue light resulted in improved dry biomass and fruit nutritional quality. Despite these positive effects, FR supplementation was also found to induce the abortion of flowers and fruits. We hypothesized that the timing and duration of the FR supplements determine the positive or negative effects of the FR supplement on the plant. To examine this hypothesis, we compared the effect of a gradient of FR supplements (5.5, 12, and 18.1 μmol m−2 s−1) on bell pepper plants (Capsicum annuum cv. Margrethe) when they were exposed to the FR supplements at the beginning of their vegetative growth phase to when FR supplementation only began at the generative phase. We found that 12 and 18.1 μmol m−2 s−1 of FR supplements resulted in a higher yield than 5.5 μmol m−2 s−1 of FR supplements, but FR supplementation from the onset of flowering delayed fruit ripening by 5–8 days and decreased fruit yield compared to FR supplementation that began at seedling transplantation. These results indicate that the positive effect of the FR supplements on the pepper plants of the cultivar Margrethe depends on the plant’s stages of development, and a much lower FR intensity may suffice to enhance growth and yield.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".