Vegetative Propagation of American Beech Resistant to Beech Bark Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to develop vegetative propagation techniques—using tissue culture and grafting—for American beech ( Fagus grandifolia ) resistant to beech bark disease. Resterilizing the buds after excising bud scales reduced contamination of in vitro cultures derived from dormant buds. Application of a 7-day dark treatment before transferring shoots to the rooting medium improved rooting success. Plantlets gradually acclimatized to nonsterile growth conditions and set buds but failed to survive the dormant period. The application of 6-benzyladenine enhanced sprouting from roots collected from mature trees, but the excised shoots rooted poorly in vitro despite low contamination. Success of grafting scions from mature trees varied among genotypes and differed each year (30% in 2003, 12% in 2004, and 18% in 2005). Applying the growth hormone indole butyric acid to the scion before joining it to the rootstock did not increase grafting success. Survival of grafts was independent of rootstock age (1 or 2 years old). Grafting success increased when scion diameter was slightly larger than rootstock diameter. The rooting of sucker cuttings was successful for only one genotype. Critical steps, in which most failures in the propagation of American beech occur, are identified.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".