MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128700781 · doi:10.21273/horttech.10.4.714

Peach Rootstocks for the United States: Are Foreign Rootstocks the Answer?

2000· article· en· W2128700781 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G.L. Reighard

Bibliographic record

VenueHortTechnology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNematode management and characterization studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRootstockEdaphicPrunusOrchardBiologyHorticultureAgronomyAgroforestrySoil waterEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New foreign rootstocks for peaches [ Prunus persica (L.) Batsch] are now being introduced into the United States through commercial nurseries for future sales to stone fruit growers. Almost all of these rootstocks are complex Prunus L. hybrids that are propagated vegetatively. Past experience with foreign Prunus rootstocks has shown that extensive testing is critical to avoid potential problems in commercial situations due to nonadaptation of some rootstocks to North American climatic and edaphic conditions. In addition, putative resistance of introduced rootstocks to common soil diseases and other pathogens has not always carried over to orchard sites in the United States. To ensure widespread horticultural testing of new rootstocks, the NC-140 regional research group continues to serve as an unbiased tester in many different geographic and production areas of the United States and Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHortTechnologySame topicNematode management and characterization studiesFrench-language works237,207