MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097360721 · doi:10.1139/x05-223

Effects of serial grafting, ontogeny, and genotype on rooting of<i>Quercus rubra</i>cuttings

2006· article· en· W2097360721 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
James J. Zaczek, Kim C. Steiner, Charles W. Heuser, Walter M. Tzilkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Disease Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsCuttingRootstockSeedlingBiologyJuvenileShootGraftingBotanyHorticultureOntogenyVegetative reproductionEcologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bud grafts, up to three series over 3 years, were made on seedling and tree rootstocks using scions from juvenile and mature northern red oak (Quercus rubra L.). Serial grafts on juvenile rootstock used buds collected from shoots developed from grafted scions of prior years. Rooting trials were performed in years 2 and 3 with shoot cuttings developed in situ on seedlings and trees and developed from successful grafts. Without grafting, cuttings from seedlings rooted more frequently and had more roots than cuttings from trees. Significant variation within maturation groups due to genotype and ontogeny obscured absolute between-group differences. Grafting scions of juvenile origins onto seedling rootstock had little effect on percent rooting and the number of roots for cuttings. Grafting onto seedling rootstock tended to increase rooting and the number of roots for cuttings from mature origins, but the effect was not progressive with increasing grafting series. Grafting onto mature rootstock did not affect rooting of cuttings from juvenile or mature origins collected in the first growing season after grafting, but cuttings from juvenile scions collected in the second growing season exhibited reduced percent rooting compared with cuttings from seedling controls. Results suggest that northern red oak buds are predetermined in their developmental fate relative to rooting parameters and are only minimally influenced by grafting. The true effect of grafting on the subsequent rooting of cuttings may be mediated through processes other than rejuvenation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicPlant Disease Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207