Grafting Effect of Different Olive Cultivars on “Barnea” Olive (K18) at Al-Karak Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The experiment was conducted at Al-Rabba Agricultural Research Station (31°27′57.34″N, 35°740′984.0″E), North to Karak city. It was designed to study the impact of time of grafting of different olive cultivars using K18 olive as rootstock for them. Seven olive cultivars were selected (Nabali Baladi, Frontoio, Grosadi, Rassei, Manzanillo, Nasohi and K18). The K18 cultivar was used as the control, at which scion of K18 grafted on the K18 rootstock. Two factors, olive cultivars in addition to two different grafting times, late January and mid-March, were arranged in randomized complete block design replicated three times. Results showed that, different times of grafting significantly affected all parameters studied, except number of leaves. Significant differences were observed among cultivars for all variables studied, except for number of sprouts per grafting. The time of grafting Results showed that maximum sprouting percentage (73.8%), number of sprouts (4.1), shoot length (12.23 cm), shoot diameter (2.56 mm), leaves per shoot (17.05) and minimum days to sprouting (26.6) were recorded in olive trees grafted in mid-March. While trees grafted on late January take higher number of days to sprout (32.7), minimum sprouting percentage (67.7%) and shoot diameter (2.19 mm). The cultivars performance results showed that maximum sprouting percentage (71.8%), shoot length (11.48 cm), leaves per shoot (17.43), lower days to sprouting (28.5) and shoot diameter (2.06 mm) were attained by the cultivar Nabali Baladi, while Rassei showed lower sprouting percentage (62.7%), leaves per shoot (12.80) and maximum days to sprouting (30.1). It was concluded that mid-March is the optimum time for grafting of olive cultivars, specifically Nabali Baladi in this area.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".