MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2184187859 · doi:10.21273/hortsci.43.1.134

Growth and Photosynthetic Responses of Three Lycoris Species to Levels of Irradiance

2008· article· en· W2184187859 on OpenAlexaff
Panpan Meng, Ying-En Ge, Qianjin Cao, Jie Chang, Peng Pan, Chi Liu, Yijun Lü, Scott X. Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueHortScience · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSunlightPottingIrradianceCymbidiumBiologyBotanyPhotosynthesisHorticulturePotting soilBiomass (ecology)Ornamental plantAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lycoris species have appealing characteristics for potting plants, cut flowers, and landscaping decorations, including attractive foliage, which is very similar to that of cymbidium. Lycoris species have been extensively propagated and marketed in Asia. Understanding the response of Lycoris spp. to irradiance intensity will help the horticultural industry improve the production of potting plants of those species. We studied the responses of photosynthesis, growth, and biomass allocation of potted Lycoris spp. ( L. chinensis, L. longituba , and L. sprengeri ) bulbs grown under three levels of irradiance, i.e., 100%, 70%, and 30% full sunlight. We found that in terms of biomass production L. chinensis can be cultivated under all levels of irradiance studied from full to 30% sunlight. For L. longituba , high irradiance levels increased the rate of net photosynthesis. For both L. chinensis and L. longituba , the full sunlight treatment produced the most attractive plants characterized by shorter, wider, and darker green leaves, features that appeal to consumers. However, none of the growth traits of L. sprengeri were affected by the irradiance treatment over the entire experimental period. It can be concluded that potting plants of L. chinensis and L. longituba are best produced under full sunlight, whereas L. sprengeri can be produced under irradiance levels from 30% to full sunlight.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.107 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHortScienceSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207