Improving Phosphorus Acquisition in Wheat Through Root Traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phosphorus (P) is an important nutrient that wheat needs to grow well and produce good yields. But many soils don’t have enough phosphorus. This makes it hard for wheat to grow properly and use nutrients well. This study talks about how wheat roots help the plant take in phosphorus. It also looks at ways to make this process better by using breeding and farming methods. The study looks at different root shapes and how roots work. It also talks about how soil microbes help, and how modern tools like high-throughput screening, marker-assisted selection (MAS), and gene editing can be used. The results show that wheat with longer roots, more root hairs, and the ability to release helpful acids and enzymes can do better in low-phosphorus soils. These root traits help the plant take in more phosphorus and grow stronger. Helpful microbes in the soil and breeding tools like MAS and genomic selection also make phosphorus uptake better. If we improve wheat roots, we can use less chemical fertilizer and grow crops in a way that’s better for the environment. These improvements can increase wheat yields and help farmers use resources more wisely. This also supports modern, efficient farming.
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) | 0.001 | 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".