ArticleScientific reports2026
Predictive modeling of millet growth in pesticide- and vinasse-amended soils using SHAP regression interpretation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Soil contamination by persistent agrochemicals such as tebuthiuron (TB) and thiamethoxam (TX), together with the use of agroindustrial by-products like vinasse (VN), affects soil-plant interactions and crop development. This study evaluated the biometric responses of Pennisetum glaucum grown by measuring root and shoot dry biomass and leaf chlorophyll index in soils treated with combinations of TB, TX, and VN under controlled greenhouse conditions. Nine regression models were tested to predict plant responses based on these variables, considering or not plant development time, and interpreted using Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP). The Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) and Random Forest (RF) models achieved the highest predictive performance (R² up to 0.27), whereas model accuracy declined sharply (R² < 0.05) when time was excluded, confirming its critical influence on predictive reliability. Vinasse improved plant growth, while TB and TX exerted neutral or negative effects, reflecting their persistence and potential phytotoxicity. These findings demonstrate the capacity of interpretable machine learning to elucidate soil-plant-contaminant interactions and support the design of sustainable management strategies for pesticide-impacted agricultural soils.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.