MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785693937 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2017-0415

Biochar as a growing media component for containerized production of Douglas-fir

2018· article· en· W2785693937 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jessica L. Sarauer, Mark D. Coleman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSeedling growth and survival studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiocharSeedlingFertilizerPeatBiomass (ecology)AgronomyPhotosynthesisLeaching (pedology)Environmental scienceBiologyBotanyChemistrySoil waterEcologyPyrolysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the inland northwestern United States (US), Douglas-fir artificial regeneration commonly includes growing seedlings in media containing sphagnum peat. Concerns over the sustainability of peat and rising plant production costs are initiating investigation of growing media alternatives. Biochar is a potential media amendment that has positive physical and chemical properties for seedling production, including high water and nutrient retention due to large surface area, which may reduce leaching losses and improve fertilizer use efficiency. We used different amounts of biochar to amend peat-based growing media to determine if seedling growth response to various fertilizer rates differed with biochar amendments. Every 13 weeks for 39 weeks, replicate seedlings were measured for photosynthetic activity, destructively harvested, and analyzed for leaf nitrogen concentration. Biochar did not reduce fertilizer rates required to grow equal-sized seedlings or improve seedling growth. When mixed with peat at rates of 25% or 50% by volume, biochar progressively reduced height and diameter growth rates, seedling biomass, and photosynthetic rate. Biochar increased growing media pH to levels incompatible with conifer seedling requirements and decreased media extractable P concentration, which may have caused decreased photosynthesis. Adjusting pH of the biochar used would be necessary to grow Douglas-fir seedlings for forest regeneration.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations27
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicSeedling growth and survival studiesFrench-language works237,207