Determining the glyphosate tolerance of eastern white cedar: First year post-treatment results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about the silvicultural traits of eastern white cedar (Thuja occidentalis L.), and especially the tolerance of seedlings to herbicides. A study was established to determine the sensitivity of cedar seedlings to timing and concentration of glyphosate applications. Glyphosate was applied to seedlings at three concentrations (1.04, 2.07, and 4.14 acid equivalent (ae) kg ha-1) at three times (July 28, August 10 and August 31) and their survival and growth was compared with that of seedlings in three control treatments (competition free, always competition, and competition free after an August 10 application of 2.07 kg ha-1 glyphosate) for a total of 12 treatments. Damage to foliage increased (r2 = 0.99) and first-year volume growth decreased (r2 = 0.91) with increasing glyphosate concentration. Glyphosate applied at 4.14 kg ha-1 killed 9% of the seedlings; even the lowest concentration of glyphosate (1.04 kg ha-1) reduced first-year volume growth more than continuous herbaceous competition. Application timing did not affect the amount of foliar damage or the growth of seedlings. However, in the winter following the treatments, snow damage was greater in the weed-free control seedlings than in all other treatments.
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".