Irrigation Scheduling for ‘Sovereign Coronation’ Table Grapes Based on Evapotranspiration Calculations and Crop Coefficients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several irrigation treatments were evaluated on ‘Sovereign Coronation’ (Vitis labruscana) table grapes at two vineyard sites in Ontario, Canada in 2003 to 2005 to assess the usefulness of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Penman-Monteith equation for predicting vine irrigation needs. Data (relative humidity, wind speed, solar radiation, and temperature) for calculating reference evapotranspiration (ETo) were downloaded from the Ontario Weather Network. The five irrigation treatments were nonirrigated control plus four based on combinations of one of two ETo values [100% (ET100) or 150% (ET150)] and two crop coefficients [Kc (fixed at 0.75 or 0.5–0.8 based upon increasing canopy volume)] used to calculate the required irrigation water volume. Transpiration (Ts), leaf water potential (ψ), and soil moisture data were collected in all three seasons. Yield components data were collected and berries were analyzed for soluble solids, pH, titratable acidity (TA), anthocyanins, methyl anthranilate (MA), and total volatile esters (TVE). Irrigation typically increased Ts rate and soil moisture; the nonirrigated treatment showed consistently lower Ts and soil moisture over the three seasons. Irrigation also increased leaf ψ, which was lower throughout the three seasons for nonirrigated vines. Irrigation additionally increased yield and its various components (clusters per vine, cluster weight, and berries per cluster) in 2005. Berry weights were higher for irrigated treatments at both sites, and were consistently the main variable leading to yield increases. Soluble solids was highest for the Kc = 0.75 treatments. pH, TA, anthocyanins, and phenols were highest in nonirrigated treatments in 2003 and 2004, but were highest in irrigated treatments in 2005. MA and TVE were highest in the ET150 treatments. The use of irrigation was effective in reducing water stress and for improving yield and fruit composition of ‘Sovereign Coronation’ table grapes in the Niagara region of Ontario. The ET150 treatments were particularly beneficial. Soil and vine water status measurements indicated that irrigation was required for Summer 2003 and 2005 due to dry conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".