Rooting characteristics and turfgrass quality of three bermudagrass cultivars and a zoysiagrass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Warm season turfgrasses are increasingly used throughout the transitional areas of Mediterranean countries due to their low water requirements. A two-year field study was carried out in north-eastern Italy to evaluate the turf canopy quality and root system architecture of three seeded bermudagrass cultivars (La Paloma, Princess-77 and Yukon), and a zoysiagrass (Companion) under non-irrigated conditions. Plots (1.6×4.5 m) were established in July 2005 and arranged in a randomized complete block with three replicates. Visual quality ratings were assessed weekly from April to November in 2006 and 2007. Soil cores were collected at depths of 0–3, 3–8, 8–15, 15–25 and 25–40 cm in August 2006, January 2007, May 2007 and September 2007 to measure main rooting characteristics: root length density (RLD), root mass density (RMD) and root diameter. Companion zoysiagrass had higher canopy quality than bermudagrass cultivars in early spring and in the late growing season, while it displayed poorest quality from June to October. Among the bermudagrass cultivars, Yukon showed the highest quality in both years. Differences in RLD among grasses appeared to be related to seasonal changes in air temperature and precipitation. In August 2006 Companion zoysiagrass averaged 3.5–4.4 cm cm−3 less RLD than bermudagrass cultivars La Paloma and Princess-77. Visual turf quality was positively correlated to the RLD and RMD in the 25–40 cm soil layer, whereas no correlations were found with root diameters nor any parameter collected in the upper soil layers. Deep-rooting cultivars may have an advantage in deficit soil moisture periods resulting in higher quality turf throughout the year.
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".