MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135836119 · doi:10.24266/0738-2898-39.1.33

From Propagation to Field: Influence of Tray Design on Tree Seedling Quality and Performance1

2021· article· en· W3135836119 on OpenAlexaff
Darby McGrath, Jason Henry, Ryan Munroe, Charlene Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Horticulture · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSeedling growth and survival studies
Canadian institutionsVineland Research and Innovation Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeedlingTransplantingTrayHorticultureGreenhouseRoot systemBiologyBotanyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study evaluated the effects of low, moderate and high substrate exposure air-pruning propagation trays on eastern cottonwood ( Populus deltoides W. Bartram ex Marshall ssp. deltoides ) and black cherry ( Prunus serotina Ehrh.) seedling root system quality and overall performance. Root system quality was characterized primarily by proportion of coarse root defects within the container imprint. Seedlings were evaluated after a nearly four-month commercial greenhouse production phase and one year after transplanting into a nursery field. Above and below-ground growth were measured at both time points. Proportions of coarse root defects, indicating degree of root deflection in container production, were persistent between greenhouse and field production phases. The Open (high substrate exposure) tray produced seedlings with roughly three times less deflected coarse root weight compared to the Closed Wall (low substrate exposure) tray for both species in both production phases. At neither production phase were there significant differences in above-ground growth among trays. This corroborates findings from other research studies that have found that variable root system quality does not always result in above-ground growth differences; and that when it does, differences in growth may take several years to manifest. Index words: , tree seedling quality, root defects, transplant performance, above-ground growth. Species used in this study: eastern cottonwood ( Populus deltoides W. Bartram ex Marshall ssp. deltoides ), black cherry ( Prunus serotina Ehrh.).

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 score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental HorticultureSame topicSeedling growth and survival studiesFrench-language works237,207