Sunki Mandarin vs Poncirus trifoliata Hybrids as Rootstocks for Pera Sweet Orange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obtaining new rootstocks that have resistance to biotic and abiotic factors is one of the main goals of breeding programs for citrus. This study evaluated the performance of 42 hybrids of Sunki mandarin (Citrus sunki Hort. ex Tanaka) vs. Poncirus trifoliata cv. Rubidoux, as rootstock for Pera sweet orange. The experiment was conducted in Colômbia, São Paulo, Brazil, in randomized blocks with three replications in a spacing of 6.0 m x 3.5 m. The trees were seven years old and the experiment was conducted without irrigation. We quantified the variables height, diameter and canopy volume, and production of plants, besides the physico-chemical analysis of fruits. After the natural period of drought in the region, the trees were evaluated for resistance to drought, with scale ranging from 1 to 3. Plants were also evaluated for symptoms of citrus sudden death and compatibility canopy/rootstock. Differences were observed in height, diameter and canopy volume of Pera sweet orange grafted on 42 hybrids of Sunki mandarin x Poncirus trifoliata (TSxPT). Differences were observed in the physico-chemical characteristics of fruits of Pera sweet orange grafted on different hybrids TSxPT. Different degrees of drought tolerance were observed and six hybrids were resistant. The hybrids TSxPT 245 and 254 showed incompatibility with variety of Pera sweet orange.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".