Development of tensile strength in compatible and incompatible sweet cherry graftings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tensile strengths of graftings between three selected sweet cherry cultivars and five selected cherry rootstocks were determined with an Instron instrument 6, 12, and 18 weeks after grafting and compared with the tensile strength of self-grafted rootstocks and graftings of rootstocks used as scions. The combination of sweet cherry cultivars and rootstocks was selected to provide a range of compatibility based on preliminary work. The tensile strengths of sweet cherry cultivars grafted on different rootstocks never exceeded the tensile strengths of the self-grafted rootstocks. Rootstocks grafted as scions on Prunus avium L. rootstocks and self-grafted rootstocks produced some of the strongest unions tested and also produced union strength much faster than any of the other combinations. The degree of compatibility was quantified and results indicated that if this value was below 0.2, measured 18 weeks after grafting, it corresponded to combinations with major risks of delayed incompatibility.Key words: tensile strength, grafting, compatibility, sweet cherry, Prunus avium.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".