MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SOME OBSERVATIONS ON POLLINATION AND FRUIT SETTING IN ECUADORIAN CACAO

2010· article· en· W2060319016 on OpenAlexaff
ARNE MÜNTZING

Bibliographic record

VenueHereditas · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBanana Cultivation and Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Genetics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitationBiologyLibrary sciencePollinationGenealogyBotanyComputer scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

U H l N G a short stay at the Swedish Hacienda Clenientina in ihe D neighbourhood of Bnbahoyo, Ecuador, I had an opportunity to make some observations and experiments roncerning pollination and fruit setting in Theobromu cmxio.Four trees growing close to the hacienda and numbered 2, 3, 4 and 5 were used for the experiments.The origin of these trees is not quite clear, but they are most probably derived from crosses between ))Cacao National,, the widespread native cacao variety of Ecuador, and trees raised from seeds imported from Venezuela.A total of 156 flowers were pollinated, 81 with pollen froin the same tree, 75 with pollen from other trees.On account of the structure of the flowers, which normally prevents spontaneous self-fertilization, it was not necessary to emasculate the flowers.However, before pollination the virginity of the stigmata was controlled with the help of a strong lens.Only flowers newly opened were used, and these were pollinated in thr morning or some time before noon.Results of self-pollincrtions.-On trees Nos. 2, 3 and 4 all selfpollinated flowers were abscissed and fell to the ground before the end of the 3rd day.The numbers of pollinated flowers were 14, 29 and 13 respectively.A few of theso flowers, however, were used for fixation €or embryological studies before the flowers had yet fallen.Nevertheless the pollin:ction\ clearly sliow that these three trees are self-incompatible.The fourth tree, No. 5, on the contrary, was found to be self-compatible.Of 13 self-pollinated flowers, which were allowed to develop up to 12 days before they were fixed, 11 showed 2111 obvious fruit setting and an even and regular development.Twelve additional self-pollinated flowers were fixed within 3 days, before it was possible to decide whether the pollination had been successful.However, all ovaries in these flowers when observed more than 24 hours after pollination sliowed an obvious swelling, indicating a positive result also Commencing fruit development Cross combination Flowers abscissed 3 x 5 . . . . . .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHereditasSame topicBanana Cultivation and ResearchFrench-language works237,207