cassava
Enable an AI agent to recognise cassava, assess a plant or harvested root lot, and determine which cultivation, harvest, handling or processing actions are justified by its identity, condition and intended use.
Research draft, second pass
A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.
Researched by: Codex
Purpose and description
Enable an AI agent to recognise cassava, assess a plant or harvested root lot, and determine which cultivation, harvest, handling or processing actions are justified by its identity, condition and intended use.
It can be Identify a specimen and qualify uncertain species or cultivar claims.; Trace and assess stem cuttings before allocating them for propagation.; Inspect crop establishment, storage-root development and health to support field actions.; Select and document a harvest based on sampled development and destination requirements.; Segregate and route harvested material according to injury, deterioration and handling history.; Request tissue-specific testing and withhold use clearance when cyanogenic-risk or processing evidence is insufficient..
Distinguishing features
Test a living specimen against a botanical identification key for Manihot esculenta using leaf, petiole, stem and, when available, reproductive characters; a common name or root photograph alone is insufficient.
Distinguish cassava from sweet potato using the whole plant: cassava has a woody shrub habit and palmately lobed leaves, whereas sweet potato has a trailing or climbing vine habit.
Distinguish cassava storage roots from yam tubers using attachment and whole-plant evidence; a detached, peeled underground organ may require traceable provenance.
Resolve 'yuca' versus 'yucca' explicitly: cassava identification should agree with a broad, lobed-leaved shrub rather than a rosette of rigid, sword-shaped leaves.
Keep cultivar identity and cyanogenic potential separate: labels such as 'sweet' or 'bitter' do not establish the suitability of a particular tissue or lot for consumption.
Scope
+ Species identification, cultivar attribution and uncertainty
+ Living plants, stem cuttings and their propagation history
+ Crop establishment, growth and storage-root development
+ Plant health and suitability as planting material
+ Harvested root or leaf identity, condition and handling history
+ Cyanogenic potential and evidence required before an intended use
- Land parcels, soil bodies and irrigation infrastructure as independently managed things
- Pests and pathogens as organisms with their own models
- Processing equipment and detoxification procedures as operational systems
- Finished foods, flour, starch, feed and other transformed products
- Human or animal exposure, poisoning diagnosis and treatment
Characteristics
- Identity confidence
- unverified | provisionally identified | verified; evidence and identifier Determines whether cassava-specific assessments and actions are applicable.
- Material form
- standing plant | stem cutting | harvested storage root | harvested leaf | mixed lot Separates propagation, cultivation, deterioration and use decisions.
- Cultivar attribution
- cultivar or accession record, local name, evidence and confidence; unknown permitted Supports interpretation of growth and intended use without treating local names as verified identities.
- Propagation lineage
- source plant or cutting lot, supplier and planting event Makes inherited identity claims and planting-material health evidence traceable.
- Time since planting
- days from documented planting date; uncertainty interval when estimated Provides context for establishment and harvest assessment without assuming a universal harvest age.
- Establishment condition
- unplanted | planted without observed emergence | emerged | established | failed Supports inspection, replacement and stand-management decisions.
- Storage-root development
- root count per sampled plant, fresh mass in kg per plant, dimensions in cm; sampling method Grounds harvest decisions in observed development and intended use.
- Health observations
- symptoms, affected organs, incidence percentage, severity method and diagnostic confidence Distinguishes observed damage from an unconfirmed disease or pest diagnosis.
- Time since harvest
- hours from harvest, with timestamp confidence Supports deterioration assessment together with injury and storage history.
- Root deterioration
- vascular discoloration, softening, rot, odour and wound observations; extent and inspection method Supports routing or rejection without equating an acceptable appearance with food safety.
- Cyanogenic potential
- mg HCN equivalents/kg with tissue, fresh or dry mass basis, analyte definition, method, sampling date and uncertainty Prevents unlike measurements or cultivar labels from being treated as equivalent evidence.
- Intended use
- propagation | food-processing input | feed-processing input | industrial input | research | undecided Determines which acceptance evidence and downstream controls are required.
Where this came from
wikidata · CC0 1.0
Also registered as vr.tr.cassava
Drafted structure
Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 5 bundles · 10 layers · 10 findings · 20 questions.
Cassava identity and material Establish what cassava material is being assessed and how confidently it is identified.
A standing shrub, a stem cutting and a detached storage root provide different identification evidence and permit different actions.
Botanical identification
Separate verified cassava identity from common-name attribution or visual resemblance.
Species evidence
Record the observed diagnostic characters and the basis for assigning Manihot esculenta.
- Which leaf, stem, root or reproductive characters support identification as Manihot esculenta? definition
- What identification key, expert determination or traceable source supports the identification? provenance
Cultivar and assessment unit
Define the plant or lot being assessed and qualify cultivar claims.
Material boundary and lineage
Record whether evidence applies to a plant, cutting lot, root lot or leaf lot and whether that unit contains mixed origins.
- Does this assessment cover one plant or a lot of cuttings, roots or leaves, and what makes that unit sufficiently uniform? boundary
- Which source records support the cultivar or local-name attribution, and could the unit contain multiple cultivars? provenance
Vegetative propagation and establishment Assess cassava stem material and its transition into an established crop.
Stem-cutting provenance, condition and establishment outcomes directly affect whether material can support a viable planting.
Stem-cutting readiness
Assess the identity, physical condition and health evidence of material intended for planting.
Cutting suitability
Record stem dimensions, nodes, bud condition, damage and source-plant health evidence.
- What are the cutting's length, diameter, node count and observed bud, moisture and damage conditions? measurement
- What source-plant inspections or tests support accepting this cutting lot for propagation? provenance
Field establishment
Connect planting circumstances to emergence and survival observations.
Establishment outcome
Record planting date and method alongside emergence, survival and gaps.
- What proportions of planted cuttings have emerged and survived at each inspection, using which denominator? measurement
- Do observed failures justify further diagnosis or replacement under the local planting plan? action
Crop development and health Assess storage-root development and distinguish crop stress observations from supported diagnoses.
Cassava harvest and propagation decisions require evidence about below-ground development as well as the condition of leaves and stems.
Storage-root development
Measure root development in the context of cultivar, crop age and destination.
Harvest readiness evidence
Use representative root observations rather than calendar age alone to assess harvest readiness.
- What root count, fresh mass, size distribution and relevant quality measurements were obtained from a documented sample? measurement
- Do those observations meet the intended recipient's requirements, or should harvest be deferred or resampled? action
Symptoms and diagnostic confidence
Keep foliar, stem and root symptoms distinct from their possible causes.
Health and propagation implications
Record symptom distribution, diagnostic evidence and implications for retaining stems as planting material.
- Are mosaic or chlorotic leaves, distortion, dieback, root necrosis or other symptoms present, and how widespread are they? measurement
- What diagnostic evidence is needed before assigning a cause or accepting affected plants as a source of cuttings? action
Harvest and root deterioration Track harvested cassava roots from removal through condition assessment and routing.
Elapsed time, injury and handling conditions are necessary to judge harvested roots whose condition can change after removal.
Harvest integrity
Connect root lots to their harvest event and physical damage.
Harvest history and injury
Record harvest timing, field origin, root breakage and subsequent handling.
- When and from which plants or field unit were these roots harvested, and when were they inspected? provenance
- What fraction of sampled roots is cut, broken, bruised or otherwise damaged, and how was damage assessed? measurement
Postharvest condition
Assess internal and external deterioration without assuming its cause from appearance alone.
Deterioration and routing
Record discoloration and decay observations together with the evidence supporting a destination decision.
- What vascular discoloration, softening, rot or odour is observed in a representative sample, and under what storage history? measurement
- Which documented acceptance criteria justify processing, further inspection, segregation or rejection of this lot? action
Cyanogenic potential and use Represent tissue-specific cyanogenic evidence and the conditions governing transfer to an intended use.
Species identity, cultivar names and acceptable appearance cannot by themselves establish whether cassava material is suitable for food or feed use.
Tissue-specific risk evidence
Keep root, peel and leaf evidence separate and make analytical results interpretable.
Cyanogenic measurement context
Record the sampled tissue, lot coverage, analytical method and reporting basis for any cyanogenic measurement.
- Which tissue and lot were sampled, and how does the sample represent the material being assessed? boundary
- What was measured, by which method, in which units and mass basis, and with what uncertainty or detection limit? measurement
Use qualification and handoff
Link intended use to required processing and verification evidence held by neighbouring models.
Intended-use evidence gate
Record whether material may enter a specified downstream process and identify unresolved conditions before consumption or feeding.
- Is this material intended for planting, food processing, feed processing or industrial use, and which receiving specification applies? boundary
- What processing and verification evidence must the downstream model supply before consumption or feeding can be authorised? action
What the second pass must settle
- Does the registry intend cassava to cover harvested leaves and stem-cutting lots as well as plants and roots, or do existing neighbouring models own those forms?
- Which botanical references and cultivar authorities should govern identification and reconciliation of local names in the deployment region?
- Which locally validated criteria should govern cutting acceptance, crop sampling and harvest readiness for each intended use?
- Which diagnostic methods and regional plant-health requirements should govern movement and reuse of cassava planting material?
- Which tissue-specific analytical methods, destination standards and validated downstream processes should govern food or feed qualification?