MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7077045260 · doi:10.5376/msb.2025.16.0007

The Study on the Effect of Soil Improvement on the Growth and Quality of De-toxic Mother Plants and Seedlings of Wu Yao

2025· article· en· W7077045260 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Soil Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)Soil qualityQuality (philosophy)Sustainable developmentSoil managementSoil healthCropSeedling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study mainly aims to clarify whether different soil improvement methods will affect the growth conditions and quality of the mother plants and seedlings of Wu Yao (Lindera aggregata). Several soil treatment methods were examined, such as adding organic fertilizers, adjusting the regular watering habits, and using beneficial microbial communities, to improve the soil environment, promote better plant growth, enhance root development, and increase the biomass of the entire plant and the quality of its medicinal parts. Soil conditions and regional natural environments vary greatly, so when growing Wu Yao, one cannot simply copy methods from other places but must adjust soil management strategies based on local specific circumstances. To ensure the sustainable development of Wu Yao cultivation, this study recommends some environmentally friendly practices, such as implementing crop rotation or using more eco-friendly soil additives. These measures not only benefit soil health but also reduce the ecological burden. This study hopes to provide a scientific basis for soil improvement strategies for the sustainable and efficient cultivation of Wu Yao mother plant gardens, improve seedling quality and yield, and promote the green development of ecological cultivation of traditional Chinese medicinal materials.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueMolecular Soil BiologySame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207