KEANEKARAGAMAN TANAMAN UMBI – UMBIAN YANG BERPOTENSI SEBAGAI PANGAN ALTERNATIF DI KECAMATAN RENDANG DAN BEBANDEM, KABUPATEN KARANGASEM, BALI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This study aimed to explore and identify the types of tubers, processing methods, utilization, morphological characteristics and nutritional content of tuber plants found in Rendang District and Bebandem District, Karangasem Regency. The method used was descriptive method with interview techniques, field observations, exploration, collection and documentation. The results showed there are 9 types of tubers were found, namely Manihot esculenta Crantz., Ipomoea batatas L., Colocasia esculenta L., Xanthosoma sagittifolium (L.) Schott, Amorphophallus campanulatus BI., Dioscorea alata L., D. bulbifera L., D. bulbifera L., D. hipsida Dennts, and D. aculeata. There were three variants were identified for Manihot esculenta, 5 variants of Ipomoea batatas, 4 variants of Xantosoma sagittifolium, 1 variant of Colocasia esculenta, 1 variant of Amorphophallus campalunatus, 4 variants of D. alata, 2 variants of D. aculeata, 1 variant of D. hipsida and 2 variants of D. bulbifera. The utilization of each type of tubers varies : cassava, taro, and sweet potato can be boil, grilled, steamed, fried, while the other 2 types, namely gadung and suweg, require special treatment before consumption because these tubers can cause poisoning. Utilization of other organs from the type of tubers can be used as vegetables (cassava leaves, sweet potato leaves, taro leaves, taro leaf stalks), traditional medicine (uwi and sweet potato), animal feed (taro stems, sweet potato leaves) and as a support for the family economy. The description and morphological character of each type of tuber are different. Differences in morphological characters are seen in stature, tubers (shape, structure, size, color), stem (shape, structure, size, color), leaves (shape, structure, size, color). All tubers found can be alternative carbohydrate source to rice because they have complex nutritional content. Key words : Manihot esculenta Crantz., Ipomoea batatas L., Colocasia esculenta L., Xanthosoma sagittifolium (L.) Schott, Amorphophallus campanulatus BI., Dioscorea spp.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".