Storability and root freezing tolerance of Norway spruce (<i>Picea abies</i>) seedlings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the study was to evaluate if root freezing tolerance and post-storage survival of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) seedlings can be improved by cool storage prior to frozen storage. Four-year-old bare-root seedlings were lifted and put into cool or frozen storage at 2-week intervals from mid-September to mid-December. Length of cool (5.5°C) storage prior to frozen (-4.6°C) storage was 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, or 12 weeks. Root freezing tolerance, determined directly by freezing-induced electrolyte leakage and indirectly by shoot and root dry matter content, were assessed at lifting and biweekly during cool storage. At these occasions, seedlings were also transferred from cool storage to frozen storage. Survival of the seedlings was assessed in a cultivation test in April. Root freezing tolerance increased for seedlings put into cool storage before November, whereas seedlings put into cool storage from November onwards did not increase in root freezing tolerance. Electrolyte leakage after root freezing to -5°C at the time of transfer to frozen storage correlated to post-storage survival of seedlings pretreated up to 6 weeks. Lifting for successful overwinter storage could be done up to 1 month earlier if seedlings were pretreated in cool storage 6 weeks before transfer to frozen storage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".