Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bare-root, vegetatively propagated plants (average 15-cm leaf spread) of a white-flowered Phalaenopsis Taisuco Kochdian clone were imported in late May and planted either in a mix consisting of three parts medium-grade douglas fir bark and one part each of perlite and coarse canadian sphagnum peat (by volume) or in chilean sphagnum moss. All plants were given 200 mg·L −1 each of nitrogen and phosphorus, 100 mg·L −1 calcium, and 50 mg·L −1 magnesium at each irrigation with 0, 50, 100, 200, 300, 400, or 500 mg·L −1 potassium (K). After 8 months, K concentration did not alter the number of new leaves on plants in either medium. Plants grown in moss produced four to five leaves, whereas those planted in the bark mix produced only two to three leaves. K concentration did not affect the length of the uppermost mature leaves when grown in the bark mix. However, in moss, plants had increasingly longer and wider top leaves as K concentration increased. The lower leaves on plants in the bark mix lacking or receiving 50 mg·L −1 K showed symptoms of yellowing, irregular purple spots, and necrosis after spiking and flowering, respectively. Yellowing and necrosis started from the leaf tip or margin and progressed basipetally. Symptoms became more severe during flower stem development and flowering. All of the plants lacking K were dead by the end of flowering. Leaf death originated from the lowest leaf and advanced to the upper leaves. K at 50 mg·L −1 greatly reduced and 100 mg·L −1 completely alleviated the symptoms of K deficiency at the time of flowering. However, by the end of flowering, plants receiving 50 or 100 mg·L −1 K had yellowing on one or two lower leaves. Plants grown in moss and lacking K showed limited signs of K deficiency. All plants in the bark mix bloomed, whereas none in sphagnum moss receiving 0 mg·L −1 K produced flowers. For both media, as K concentration increased, flower count and diameter increased. Flower stems on plants in either medium became longer and thicker with increasing K concentration. To obtain top-quality Phalaenopsis with the greatest leaf length, highest flower count, largest flowers, and longest inflorescences, it is recommended that 300 mg·L −1 K be applied under high N and high P conditions regardless of the medium.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".