Response of Container-grown Nursery Plants to Chlorine Used to Disinfest Irrigation Water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recycling of irrigation water may cause the dispersal of plant pathogens. Irrigation water disinfected with 2.4 mg·L −1 of free chlorine for 5 min was overhead-applied to 17 container-grown nursery plants for 11 weeks in a commercial nursery to evaluate the response of container-grown nursery plants to chlorine. No visual symptoms of injury or growth reduction were observed on the evergreen shrubs ( Juniperus horizontalis , Thuja occidentalis , Buxus microphylla , Picea glauca , Rhododendron catawbiense , Taxus media , and Chamaecyparis pisifera ), but there were visual injuries and/or growth reduction on some of the deciduous shrubs ( Salix integra , Hydrangea paniculata , Prunus × cistena , Weigela florida , Physocarpus opulifolius ). Symptoms of anthracnose were reduced on Cornus alba plants treated with chlorinated water. The chlorine treatment did not affect leaf chlorophyll content. The chlorine treatment killed all fungi and oomycetes in the irrigation water (DNA multiscan). Although there were visible leaf injuries and growth reduction on some of the deciduous plants, chlorine injury did not render them unsalable. Results suggest that irrigation water treated with 2.4 mg·L −1 free chlorine for 5 min will effectively control the dispersal of common plant pathogens without reducing the market value of container-grown plants.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".