Biochar effects on germination and radicle extension in temperate tree seedlings under field conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pyrolyzed organic matter, or biochar, generally increases the growth of established plants; in some cases, biochar also promotes seed germination in agricultural species, but comparable effects on tree species have received little attention. Potential biochar effects on seed germination and early seedling development were examined in a field experiment involving 14 species of temperate forest trees. Replicated sets of seeds with and without biochar (at 5 t·ha–1) were placed in mesh bags beneath leaf litter near the time of autumnal leaf fall and retrieved the following spring. Pooled analyses show a positive but small average effect of biochar on germination. Effects on seedling radicle extension growth were more pronounced, with more than a doubling in growth observed overall and large increases observed in some species, including both conifers (e.g., Picea mariana (Mill.) Britton, Sterns & Poggenb. and Pinus resinosa Sol. ex Aiton) and angiosperms (Betula papyrifera Marsh., Prunus virginiana L., and Ulmus americana L.). Species varied in responses, but differences were not related to fire or shade tolerance. The results indicate that biochar can substantially enhance early seedling development in temperate trees; likely mechanisms involve “priming” effects resulting from increased pH and potassium availability or sorption of germination-inhibiting phenolics in the litter layer.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".