MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2732977389 · doi:10.24266/0738-2898-22.3.149

Assessing the Infectivity of Commercial Mycorrhizal Inoculants in Plant Nursery Conditions

2004· article· en· W2732977389 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lea Corkidi, Edith B. Allen, Donald J. Merhaut, Michael F. Allen, James Downer, Jeff Bohn, Mike Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Horticulture · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrobial inoculantPottingPotting soilSawdustBiologyPropaguleInoculationAgronomyMycorrhizaColonizationSowingHorticultureBotanySymbiosisBacteriaEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The infectivity of ten commercial mycorrhizal inoculants was examined in nursery conditions. Corn plants were grown in a soil-based medium and in two different soilless substrates, a potting mix prepared with redwood bark, pine sawdust, calcined clay and sand, and the commercial Sunshine #5 mix, mainly composed of Canadian sphagnum peat moss. The percentage of mycorrhizal colonization obtained with the different mycorrhizal inoculants ranged from 0 to 50%. This variation might reflect the presence or absence of viable propagules, the difference in the recommended rates applied as well as the difference in the content and type of infective propagules of each product. However, the infectivity of each mycorrhizal inoculant was also influenced by the growing media. Two products promoted higher values of mycorrhizal colonization in the Sunshine mix, three in the nursery mix and one in the soil-based medium. Mycorrhizal colonization did not enhance plant growth. Only the plants inoculated with the products that did not promote mycorrhizal colonization increased their growth relative to the non-inoculated controls, suggesting the presence of other growth promoters in the inoculum products. Based on these results, nurseries should conduct preliminary tests to determine which inoculants will perform in their potting mixes to assure the best fit of inoculum with their particular conditions.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.498
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations113
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental HorticultureSame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207