Comparing Physical, Chemical, and Cold Stratification Methods for Alleviating Dormancy of Giant Ragweed (<i>Ambrosia trifida</i>) Seeds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Giant ragweed has become an increasingly important weed of arable land in many parts of North America. It is now a common weed of row crop production systems, a fact that can be attributed to earlier crop planting dates, reduced tillage, and the development of resistance to Group 2 and 9 herbicides. The propagation of giant ragweed seedlings for experimental purposes is a lengthy process because up to 90 d of stratification is often required to alleviate primary seed dormancy. The objective of this research was to evaluate physical, chemical, and cold stratification methods for alleviating seed dormancy in giant ragweed and reducing the length of cold stratification required. Results indicate that the most effective method for alleviating dormancy in seed of giant ragweed is to excise the embryo from its covering structures. By excising the embryo, 96% of viable giant ragweed seeds germinated with no stratification. In contrast, untreated seeds required a minimum of 6 wk of stratification to alleviate dormancy in a similar proportion of the population. Although excising embryos requires time and effort, the time savings relative to stratification make it an attractive method for propagating giant ragweed seedlings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".