Effect of planting bed shape, mulch and soil density on root yield and shape in North American ginseng (<i>Panax quinquefolius</i> L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ginseng root value varies with shape. To increase understanding of factors affecting root shape and growth, we conducted a 4-yr field experiment with three planting bed shapes with and without straw mulch cover, and 3-yr duplicate experiments with varied soil textures and bulk densities (BD). Panax quinquefolius L. plants either remained undisturbed for 3 yr in vertical tiles where sand or loam soil was compacted to differing BD, or were transplanted into low BD soil after 1 yr. Transplanting aimed to demonstrate the influence of conditions encountered in the first year of growth on mature root shape, and to explore opportunities to manage beds and manipulate root shape in transplanted ginseng, which may be a common practice in future. Without mulch, 4th year root yields were reduced by 65%, primarily due to a 60% reduction in plant stand which occurred by the end of the seedling year. Seeding directly into the ground resulted in yields similar to conventional rounded beds and a greater proportion of roots of favourable shape, likely due to greater soil BD in ground plots than round beds. Relative to low BD, high BD soil resulted in shorter, rounder "chunk" grade roots after 1 and 3 yr growth in situ. After 3 yr, roots were shorter and rounder in loam than in sand. Soil BD effects were not retained after 3 yr for replants, so high BD pre-treatment of transplants will not improve root shape over the longer term. Moderate soil compaction may reduce production of undesirable pencil-grade roots, but there is a yield trade-off with high BD soils. A high BD must be maintained for >1 yr, and a decline in stand is likely in compacted loam soil which has slow drainage. Key words: Root grade, North American ginseng, American ginseng
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".