Effects of Illumination Intensity on Ornamental Characteristics of <i>Neoregelia</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neoregelia has high ornamental value, which is tolerant to shade and drought. In addition, the daily maintenance and management of it is easy and convenient, so it is very popular with consumers. However, illumination intensity has great impact on its blade color. The four seasons in the south of Yangtze River are distinct, and cooling and shading in summer are contradictory, resulting in difficulty in production. This study introduced the morphological characteristics and growth habit of Neoregelia . Through a series of experiments in both plain and mountain sites, we confirmed that the optimum illumination intensity for most varieties of Neoregelia was 50~55 klx. During production procedure, 50% shading rate could ensure illumination intensity under 55 klx, but some green blade varieties need weaker illumination intensity. The shading rate should be kept under 70% to maintain regular blade color. 70 klx illumination intensity could burn the blade of Neoregelia . This study could provide guidance for production and daily management of Neoregelia .
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".