MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083541727 · doi:10.4141/cjps07206

1-Methylcyclopropene treatment modifies postharvest behavior of Fantasia nectarines

2008· article· en· W2083541727 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jennifer R. DeEll, Dennis P. Murr, Behrouz Ehsani‐Moghaddam

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRipening1-MethylcyclopropenePostharvestHorticultureEthyleneChemistryFleshPrunusCold storageBotanyBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of 1-methylcyclopropene (1-MCP), an inhibitor of ethylene action, on the ripening and quality of Fantasia nectarines were examined. Fruit were harvested from two commercial orchards and subsequently exposed to 1 μL L -1 of 1-MCP for 24 h at 0°C. Following treatment, fruit were held at 0°C for 0, 2, or 4 wk, and then assessed for quality during a ripening period at 23°C. 1-MCP treatment improved postharvest firmness retention in nectarines after 0 and 2 wk at 0°C plus 4 days at 23°C. Soluble solids concentration (SSC) was lower in nectarines treated with 1 MCP and held for 0 or 4 wk at 0°C, compared with similar non-treated fruit. The peel ground color change from green to yellow was also delayed by 1-MCP. Nectarines treated with 1-MCP exhibited less CO 2 and hydrophobic volatile production during 14 days at 23°C, compared with non-treated fruit. The overall inhibition of fruit ripening by 1-MCP appears transitory in Fantasia nectarines. Chilling injury was observed after 4 wk of storage at 0°C and 1-MCP-treated fruit had less visual chilling-related injury but greater chilling-induced flesh hardening. Further research is needed to determine the effects of 1-MCP on different chilling injury symptoms in nectarines. Key words: 1-MCP, fruit quality, ripening, storage, shelf-life, Prunus persica

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)0.001
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 score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicPostharvest Quality and Shelf Life ManagementFrench-language works237,207