Flood Irrigation of Container-grown Euonymus and Thuja as Affected by Fertilizer Rate and Substrate
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Euonymus fortunei [(Turcz.) Hand.-Mazz.] ‘Emerald Gaiety’ and Thuja occidentalis L. ‘Little Giant’ were grown outdoors in #1 (3 liter) containers for one season on waterproof, crushed stone beds flooded and drained from below the stone. Plants were grown in a bark substrate (2/3 pine bark:1/3 sphagnum peat) or a peat substrate (1/3 pine bark:2/3 sphagnum peat) with either a high or medium rate of incorporated, controlled release fertilizer [17N–2.6P–10K (Sierra 17–6–12)] [6.0 or 4.0 kg/m 3 (l0.0 or 6.7 lbs/yd 3 )]. For both species, the high fertilizer rate resulted in less top dry weight, and higher substrate electrical conductivity (EC) and NO 3 -N. Foliar N levels were also higher with the higher fertilizer rate. Compared with bark, the peat substrate resulted in less top dry weight of Thuja (not Euonymus ) and higher substrate EC, NO 3 -N and water retention, and foliar N levels. Substrate EC levels in the upper one-third [5 cm (2 in)] of the container were nearly twice those in the lower two-thirds [10 cm (4 in)], reaching 7.1 dS/m with the high fertilizer rate in peat. In comparison to plants under overhead irrigation (high fertilizer rate only), flooded plants grew as much as ( Euonymus ) or more ( Thuja ) in the bark substrate but both species grew less in the peat. Substrate EC and NO 3 -N with flood were either similar or lower in bark, but similar or higher in peat compared to overhead. The amount of roots and their distribution appeared similar for both types of irrigation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 it