Effect of planting distance and spatial arrangement on different cultivars of romaine lettuce in a controlled hydroponic environment system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lettuce is a nutritious leafy vegetable, which is cultivated worldwide. This study investigated how planting distance and patterns (non-staggered and staggered) influence different cultivar responses of romaine lettuce (Lactuca sativa). Valley Heart exhibited a higher yield at lower spacing conditions than Breen. Increasing the distance from 6.3 to 8.8 cm increased fresh mass by 46% for non-staggered patterns and 46.1% for staggered patterns for Breen and 51.8% for non-staggered patterns and 62.4% for staggered patterns for Valley Heart. Dry mass increased by 41% for non-staggered patterns, 33.7% for staggered patterns, and 58.3% for non-staggered patterns for Breen and 35.2% for staggered patterns for Valley Heart by increasing the distance from 6.3 to 10.1 cm. The tallest plant heights of 31.8 ± 4.2 cm for Breen and 46.6 ± 0.4 cm for Valley Heart were observed with a non-staggered pattern at 6.3 cm. The highest internodal elongations of 2 ± 0.3 cm and 2.3 ± 0.3 cm were additionally observed with a 6.3-cm staggered distance for Breen and non-staggered distance for Valley Heart, respectively. The spacing pattern did not significantly influence the plant growth for both cultivars. These findings contribute to a better understanding of different cultivars’ responses to planting density in terms of plant growth.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".