Growth of Containerized Atlantic White Cedar Seedlings as Affected by Container Volume, Substrate, Fertilizer, and Irrigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Germination and growth of atlantic white cedar [ Chamaecyparis thyoides (L.) B.S.P.] was evaluated in response to four container volumes (98 to 530 cm 3 ), two substrates [North Carolina Forest Service (NCFS) container mix [3 canadian peat: 2 coarse vermiculite: 1.5 perlite (by volume), and 3 composted pine bark: 1 peat (by volume)], two controlled-release fertilizers [Osmocote 15N–4.0P–10.0K (15N–9P 2 O 5 –12K 2 O), 12- to 14-month southern formulation, with micros; and Polyon 18N–2.6P–10.0K (18N–6P 2 O 5 –12K 2 O) with micros, 9-month formulation], and three irrigation frequencies (2, 3, or 4 times daily). Although growth increased up to the maximum container volume (530 cm 3 ), the optimum for 1-year-old seedlings appeared to be 164 to 262 cm 3 . The higher peat content and water holding capacity of the NCFS substrate yielded better growth than 3 bark: 1 peat. Osmocote yielded larger and heavier plants than Polyon, probably owing to more available phosphorus in the former. Irrigation three times daily was optimum. Suitable manipulation of container volume, substrate, fertilizer, and irrigation should yield high quality containerized atlantic white cedar seedlings.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".