Bibliographic record
Abstract
Baker, J. M. 2012. Vegetative propagation of kura clover: a field-scale test. Can. J. Plant Sci. 92: 1245–1251. Kura clover (Trifolium ambiguum M. Bieb.) is a potentially valuable forage legume, but it has been underutilized. A major reason is the difficulty of establishing it from seed. Since kura is rhizomatous, there have been attempts to propagate it vegetatively, but no reports of success at the field scale. Two harvesting methods were tested to transplant material from a mature 17-ha field to a newly tilled 17-ha field: a bermudagrass sprigger that harvests bare rhizome sprigs, and a potato digger that harvests crowns and rhizomes, along with soil. The harvested propagules were distributed over the new field in July 2010 with a manure spreader, then disked and packed. Survival and growth were observed for the remainder of 2010 and through 2011, and recovery of the source field was also monitored. The material harvested with the sprigger did not compete well with weeds and had virtually disappeared by midsummer 2011, but the material harvested with the potato digger thrived, steadily increasing to nearly 80% of the biomass in the new field by the 3rd cutting in summer 2011. Properly done, vegetative propagation is a viable option for kura clover establishment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".