MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123060320 · doi:10.1006/anbo.2000.1150

Beneficial Effects of Moist Chilling on the Seeds of Black Spruce (Picea mariana [Mill.] B.S.P.)

2000· article· en· W2123060320 on OpenAlexaff
Baoqing Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Botany · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSeed Germination and Physiology
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyBlack spruceGerminationDormancySeedlingBotanyStratification (seeds)HorticultureSeed dormancyAbscissionFrost (temperature)AgeingAccelerated agingShrubAgronomyEcologyTaiga

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moist chilling (cold stratification) is well-known as a simple and effective means of overcoming physiological seed dormancy and enhancing germination of many temperate tree and shrub species. However, the apparent activation of intracellular repair mechanisms in non-dormant black spruce ( Picea mariana ) seeds following moist chilling, has not previously been reported. The present contribution records the beneficial effects of moist chilling after accelerated ageing (40°C/98% relative humidity) for 3–10 d of black spruce seeds. This treatment was maximally effective after 7 d of accelerated ageing, increasing germination from 43 to 61%. Ultrastructural examination of embryo cells indicated that intracellular activation occurred during moist chilling even when seeds had not been subjected to accelerated ageing, and that the increasing levels of damage accumulating over the 3–7 d period of ageing were substantially reversed during subsequent moist chilling. The results of cold stratification of non-dormant seeds are discussed in terms of the value of this practice in nursery seedling production from seeds that are of less than the highest quality. Copyright 2000 Annals of Botany Company

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.759
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations39
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of BotanySame topicSeed Germination and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207