Selection Experiment and Analysis of Nursery Substrate in Transplanting the Tissue Culture Seedlings of Tectona grandis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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".