Use of Extenday reflective groundcover in production of ‘Gala’ apples <i>(Malus domestica)</i> in New Brunswick, Canada: 1. Impact on canopy microclimate and leaf gas exchange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A field study was conducted in New Brunswick, Canada to assess the impact of a reflective groundcover (Extenday) on ‘Gala’ (Malus domestica) apple tree microclimate (diurnal and seasonal distributions of incident and reflected photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) within the canopy, seasonal canopy air temperature and relative humidity (RH), soil temperature and moisture) and leaf gas exchange (net photosynthesis (Pn), stomatal conductance (g s ) , intercellular CO 2 (Ci), and transpiration (E)). When installed between tree rows from full‐bloom until 3 weeks post‐harvest, the 3‐m wide reflective groundcover did not influence incident PAR within the tree canopy, but enhanced the reflection and distribution of light into all canopy levels (upper, middle, lower), relative to uncovered sod. Within the lower canopy, overall relative PAR levels were increased from 29% full‐sun to 39% full‐sun (on sunny days) and levels of reflected PAR were 5–9‐fold greater (over the season), with use of the reflective groundcover. On a seasonal basis, canopy RH was reduced by 3.8 ± 1.2%, and soil moisture was increased by 5.5 ± 0.28% to 7.7 ± 0.52%, with use of the reflective groundcover; canopy air temperature was unaffected. Soil temperature beneath the reflective groundcover was as much as 2.1–2.5°C lower than that below uncovered sod, with the differential greatest earlier in the growing season and decreasing over time. Under light‐saturated conditions, the reflective groundcover did not alter leaf temperature or leaf gas exchange or lead to photoinhibition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".