Bud break and spring frost hardiness in Picea abies seedlings in response to photoperiod and temperature treatments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spring frost may result in detrimental damage in newly planted Picea abies (L.) Karst. seedlings if their growth rhythm is not sufficiently adapted to the climatic conditions on the forest site. The aims of this study were to evaluate how bud break and spring frost hardiness were influenced by short-day (SD) treatments with different timing and different temperature regimes during bud formation. Following winter storage, frost hardiness was tested after 1, 3 and 5 weeks in forcing conditions. The SD treatment advanced bud break compared with the control seedlings. In comparison, the effects of timing and the different temperatures on bud break were small. The SD treatment improved frost hardiness in first-year needles during dehardening. The early SD treatment resulted in improved frost hardiness in first-year needles and greater root collar diameter compared with later SD treatment. To avoid a second bud flush, it is important that a critical night length is attained when the SD treatment terminates. Low temperatures following the SD treatment resulted in increased hardiness of the needles and decreased hardiness of the stems. The contrasting effect of temperature in different plant tissues demonstrates the importance of examining different tissues following freezing tests.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".