MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033654134 · doi:10.1051/fruits/2013078

Relationships among postharvest ripening attributes and storage disorders in ‘Honeycrisp’ apple

2013· article· en· W2033654134 on OpenAlexaff
Behrouz Ehsani‐Moghaddam, Jennifer R. DeEll

Bibliographic record

VenueFruits · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life Management
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPostharvestRipeningBiologyHorticultureEthyleneBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction. The objective of this study was to examine the relationships among the ripening attributes of ‘Honeycrisp’ apples at harvest and after storage, and the direct and indirect contributions of these attributes to peel greasiness and the incidence of soft scald and soggy breakdown during storage using correlation and path-coefficient analyses. Materials and methods. Fruit were harvested from a commercial orchard at least five times throughout the commercial harvest period during four subsequent years (2008 to 2011). In two of the years, fruit were stored in air for 3 months at 3 °C and/or in a controlled atmosphere (1–2 kPa O2 + 1–2 kPa CO2) for 6 months at 3 °C. Fruit were analyzed at harvest and after storage. Results and discussion. Negative correlations were detected between internal ethylene concentration (IEC) and soluble solids concentration (SSC) or titratable acidity (TA) (the higher the IEC, the lower the SSC and TA) and a positive correlation between firmness and TA (the higher the firmness, the higher the TA). More peel greasiness and higher incidence of soggy breakdown during storage were associated with lower firmness, SSC and TA. Negative correlations were also detected between the incidence of soft scald and IEC or peel greasiness. The results of the path-coefficient analyses suggest that, in ‘Honeycrisp’, interrelationships among postharvest ripening indices and each individual disorder differ. Three possible path models for the interrelationships among ripening attributes (independent variables) and the incidence of peel greasiness, soft scald and soggy breakdown (dependent variables) are presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFruitsSame topicPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life ManagementFrench-language works237,207