Evaluation of Winegrapes in British Columbia: `Chardonnay' and `Pinot noir' Clones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eighty-five cultivars, selections and clones from European winegrape ( Vitis spp.) breeding and selection programs were evaluated between 1993 and 1995 in a randomized complete-block experiment. These included Vitis vinifera clones from France as well as Freiburg, Geisenheim, and Weinsberg, Germany. Small yield and fruit composition differences were found amongst the 'Chardonnay' clones. The standard Prosser clone produced wines with highest earthy aroma and acidity and with lowest perfumy aroma, body and finish; Dijon clones 76 and 96 were most perfumy and least vegetal. `Pinot noir' clones also differed somewhat in terms of yield and fruit composition; `Samtröt', `Gamay Beaujolais', and clone Q1342-01 were amongst the most highly colored clones. These clones also tended to have the most intense berry and currant aromas as well as berry, cherry, and currant flavors. These aforementioned clones appear to be highly adaptable to viticultural regions where low heat units during fruit maturation presently limit industry 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".