MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964603760 · doi:10.1139/x06-167

Early summer frost hardiness in <i>Picea abies</i> seedlings in response to photoperiod treatment

2006· article· en· W1964603760 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Halvor Rostad, Aksel Granhus, Inger Sundheim Fløistad, Svein Morgenlie

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSeedling growth and survival studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsSeedlingphotoperiodismShootFrost (temperature)HorticultureHardiness (plants)Picea abiesBiologyBotanyAnimal scienceCultivar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to previous studies, short-day (SD) treatment may increase frost hardiness in Picea abies (L.) Karst. seedlings during shoot elongation the next year. The purpose of this study was to examine how timing of the SD treatment affects spring frost hardiness. The following four treatments were applied in the first growth period: natural photoperiod (Nat), or SD treatment (8 h light : 16 h dark) either 14–28 July (SD1), 28 July – 11 August (SD2), or 11–20 August (SD3). After 125 days in cold storage (October–January), the seedlings were transferred to forcing conditions (20–25 °C, 24 h light) followed by freezing tests at –3, –5, –7, and –9 °C when most seedlings had reached bud break stage 7 (Krutzsch index). Seedling height measurements and analyses of carbohydrate status, nitrogen concentration, and dry mass of needles after cold storage were done to examine the treatments' impact on seedling quality. SD treatment reduced visual freezing injury to current- and first-year shoots. Mortality occurred at –7 and –9 °C and was significantly higher in the Nat and SD1 treatments (43% in both) than in the SD2 (23%) and SD3 (15%) treatments. Seedlings from the late SD treatments also showed better height growth and developed more shoots from dormant buds after freezing to –3 and –5 °C. Collectively, these findings demonstrate the importance of proper timing of the SD treatment in relation to the seedlings' natural growth rhythm.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicSeedling growth and survival studiesFrench-language works237,207