MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168563167 · doi:10.1017/ssr2006258

Using thermal time models to predict seedling emergence of orchardgrass (<i>Dactylis glomerata</i> L.) under alternating temperature regimes

2006· article· en· W2168563167 on OpenAlexafffund
Jie Qiu, Yuguang Bai, Bruce Coulman, J. T. Romo

Bibliographic record

VenueSeed Science Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSeed Germination and Physiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsDactylis glomerataGerminationSeedlingDormancyBotanyHorticultureBiologyAgronomyPoaceae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The effects of alternating temperatures on seed dormancy changes, germination and seedling emergence were investigated in ‘Arctic’ and ‘Lineta’ orchardgrass ( Dactylis glomerata L.). Thermal time models were successfully developed for 0, 5, 10 and 15°C temperature amplitudes, using 28 constant and alternating temperature regimes. These models were then modified by linking seed germination in Petri dishes and seedling emergence in soil. A field experiment was conducted with four seeding dates over 2 years to validate the modified thermal time models. Temperature regimes with a 5–15°C amplitude enhanced seed germination percentages of orchardgrass, indicating that the conditional dormancy was released by these temperature regimes. Base temperatures decreased with increasing temperature amplitude. Seeds germinated more rapidly under alternating temperatures than under constant temperatures. The dual effects of temperature for dormancy breaking and germination were accounted for by thermal time models based on alternating temperature regimes, which accurately predicted the timing and percentage of ‘Arctic’ and ‘Lineta’ orchardgrass seedlings emerging in the field ( R 2 ≥0.88).

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeed Science ResearchSame topicSeed Germination and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207