MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412066988 · doi:10.33059/jj.v12i1.12193

Pengaruh Media Tanam terhadap Proses Aklimatisasi Planlet Aglaonema anyamanee

2025· article· id· W4412066988 on OpenAlexaff
Nida Ul 'Izzah, Samsul Kamal, Lina Rahmawati, Zuraidah Zuraidah, Nurlia Zahara, Kurnia Rahayu Purnomo Sari

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Jeumpa · 2025
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Growth and Agriculture Techniques
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis pengaruh berbagai jenis media tanam terhadap proses aklimatisasi planlet aglonema (Aglaonema anyamanee). Aklimatisasi merupakan tahap penting dalam mikropropagasi untuk menyesuaikan planlet dengan kondisi lingkungan luar. Penelitian dilakukan menggunakan Rancangan Acak Kelompok (RAK) dengan empat perlakuan media tanam, yaitu tanah (kontrol), tanah+cocopeat (1:1), tanah+arang sekam (1:1), dan tanah+kompos (1:1), dengan tiga ulangan. Parameter yang diamati meliputi tinggi batang, jumlah daun, dan persentase hidup pada umur 41 sampai 69 HST. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa media tanam memberikan pengaruh nyata terhadap seluruh parameter pertumbuhan. Perlakuan T3 (tanah+kompos) menghasilkan pertumbuhan tertinggi pada tinggi batang (7.40 cm), lebar daun (5.23 cm), dan panjang daun (5.97 cm). perlakuan T0 dan T1 menunjukkan jumlah daun tertinggi (7.33 helai). Semua perlakuan menunjukkan persentase hidup sebesar 100%, menandakan bahwa seluruh media tanam mendukung kelangsungan hidup planlet. Media tanam berbasis kompos berdasarkan penelitian ini direkomendasikan sebagai pilihan terbaik untuk aklimatisasi Aglaonema anyamanee.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal JeumpaSame topicPlant Growth and Agriculture TechniquesFrench-language works237,207