MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2351047608

Selection Experiment and Analysis of Nursery Substrate in Transplanting the Tissue Culture Seedlings of Tectona grandis

2013· article· en· W2351047608 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSeed · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCivil and Geotechnical Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCunninghamiaSawdustSeedlingTectonaTopsoilBark (sound)HorticultureTransplantingCarbonizationBotanyBiologyChemistryEcologySoil water
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We carried out some experiments on different nursery substrates,e. g. carbonized bark,sawdust,carbonized sawdust,topsoil of Cunninghamia lanceolata,with 12 different treatments during transplanted the tissue culture seedlings of Tectona grandis. Results shows that( 1) sawdust and topsoil of Cunninghamia lanceolata can promote survival rate of the seedlings;( 2) sawdust is the only substrate that promotes the preserving rate;( 3) carbonized bark and topsoil of Cunninghamia lanceolata can accelerate the growth of seedling height and diameter;( 4) the survival rate and the preserving rate of seedling in the treatment of 50%carbonized bark + 50% topsoil of Cunninghamia lanceolata and the treatment of 80% carbonized bark + 10%carbonized sawdust + 10% sawdust are greater than 95. 1% and 95. 0%,and the average height and average diameter of one-year-seedlings in the above treatments reach 33. 4 cm,0. 68 cm respectively.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.216 · 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