Physiology and Growth of Containerized Coastal Douglas Fir Seedlings Given Different Durations of Short Days to Induce Dormancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared the effects of different durations of short days (SDs) as a dormancy-induction regime on bud development, bud endodormancy, and morphology of first-year containerized coastal douglas fir [ Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco var. menziesii ] seedlings in the nursery together with seedling survival and growth after one growing season in a common garden. In early July, four durations of 8-h SDs were applied: 3, 4, 5, and 6 weeks. During the first week of SDs, budscale initiation started and was completed; then initiation of needles for next year's leading shoot (leader) began. Needle initiation was completed 10 weeks after the start of the regime in seedlings given 5 or 6 weeks of SDs and 13 weeks for those given 3 or 4 weeks of SDs. In early October, duration of SDs had no effect on bud endodormancy; 50% to 88% of terminal buds were endodormant. On this date, seedling height and shoot dry weight were unaffected by duration of SDs, whereas root dry weight and shoot diameter were significantly reduced in seedlings given 6 weeks of SDs compared with other durations. After one growing season, duration of SDs had no effect on seedling survival, leader length, shoot dry weight, root dry weight, or shoot diameter. We recommend the 3-week duration of SDs for coastal douglas fir crops.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".