Assessment of Potential Organic Pollenicides as Apple Blossom Thinners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potential of six products to act as pollenicides on apple pollen both in vivo and in vitro was evaluated. The six candidate pollenicides used were lime sulphur (LS) (1.15% solution), ammonium thiosulphate (ATS) (0.75% solution), Surround™ WP (S) (59.2 g/L), biodiesel (BD) (5% emulsion), sodium chloride (NaCl) (8 g/L) and Horticultural-Vinegar (HV) (2% solution). It was found that ‘Golden Delicious’ blossoms that were treated with ATS, LS, S or NaCl had significantly fewer pollen grains that germinated in vivo than the treatment receiving no spray. The effect of the six candidate pollenicides was also investigated in vitro by spraying ‘McIntosh’ pollen with the candidate pollenicides and examining pollen germination, pollen tube growth length and the proportion of unviable pollen grains. All of the treatment sprays significantly reduced pollen germination compared with the control, with ATS and LS resulting in considerable reduction in pollen tube germination and HV completely hindering germination. Among those treatments that allowed some germination, only LS, ATS and BD effectively reduced the mean length that the pollen tubes grew in vitro. These laboratory results are compared with those generated in a parallel field trial to assess what stage of pollination the candidate pollenicides are targeting. Taken together these results indicate that ATS reduces pollen viability and germination on pollinated stigmas and on germination medium and is an effective blossom thinner in the field. Lime sulphur has a greater effect on pollen tube germination and growth on germination medium and is a good thinner in the field and that NaCl reduces pollen germination on pollinated stigmas and is an effective mild thinner in the field. Finally, this research suggests that while BD was an effective thinner in the field, it has less pollenicidal and greater phytotoxic effects than the Other products tested.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".