MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1821585231 · doi:10.21273/hortsci.39.3.541

Influence of Girdling and Gibberellic Acid on Yield Components, Fruit Composition, and Vestigial Seed Formation of `Sovereign Coronation' Table Grapes

2004· article· en· W1821585231 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew G. Reynolds, Christiane de Savigny

Bibliographic record

VenueHortScience · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGirdlingBerryCaneGibberellic acidBrixHorticultureTitratable acidBotanyBiologyChemistryGerminationSugar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vestigial seeds of `Sovereign Coronation' table grapes frequently form partial seedcoats that are perceptible during consumption. This problem was addressed through cane/cordon girdling and gibberellic acid (GA 3 ) sprays. `Sovereign Coronation' vines were subjected to one of five treatments [untreated control; cane/cordon girdled; 15 ppm GA 3 at bloom (GA1); GA1 + 40 ppm GA 3 14 days later (GA2); GA2 + 40 ppm GA 3 14 days later]. GA 3 had no effect on yield or clusters per vine, but postbloom GA 3 treatments increased cluster and berry weights and reduced berries per cluster. Fruit maturity was not consistently affected by the treatments, although slight increases in ° Brix and pH and decreases in titratable acidity (TA) were associated with postbloom GA 3 treatments. Use of postbloom GA 3 applications reduced the number and weight of vestigial seeds with developed seedcoats, and reduced the number and weight of undeveloped seeds as well in 2 of 3 years. Girdling increased cluster and berry weights, decreased ° Brix and TA, and increased pH. Transpiration rate of leaves on girdled vines was also higher than control vines on one sampling date. Data suggest that use of bloom and postbloom GA 3 applications to `Sovereign Coronation' may reduce the formation of perceptible vestigial seeds and thus improve the marketability of this cultivar.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHortScienceSame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207