Evaluation of growth and fruit production characteristics of 15 saskatoon (<i>Amelanchier alnifolia</i> Nutt.) cultivars at maturity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to quantitatively evaluate the growth, yield, fruit size and ripening characteristics of mature plants of 15 saskatoon (Amelanchier alnifolia Nutt.) cultivars. Data were collected from two sites in Saskatchewan over 5 yr (1999–2003). The cultivars included Bluff, Buffalo, Forestburg, Honeywood, JB30, Martin, Nelson, Northline, PAR 90, Parkhill, Pearson II, Pembina, Smoky, Success, and Thiessen. Mean annual growth of shoots ranged from 10.5 cm yr -1 for Parkhill to 21.4 cm yr -1 for JB30. The number of days for fruit to change from 10 to 90% ripe did not differ among the cultivars and averaged 13.8 d. The Julian date to attain 50% ripe fruit ranged from 196 to 209. Fruit of PAR 90, Honeywood, JB30, Martin, Success and Thiessen matured 4–13 d earlier than fruit of Bluff, Northline, Parkhill, Buffalo, Nelson, and Pembina. Marketable yields, which averaged 93.4% of the total harvested yields, ranged from 0.72 to 4.16 kg plant -1 . Pearson II, Honeywood, and Smoky had greater marketable yields (4.1–4.16 kg plant -1 ) than did PAR 90, Parkhill, Nelson, Success, and Pembina (0.72–2.49 kg plant -1 ). Thiessen, Martin, PAR 90 and JB30 had the largest fruit (13.3–13.9 mm), and Success and Bluff had the smallest (10.8–10.9 mm). Data from this study provide a basis on which to evaluate currently available cultivars and new cultivars or future selections that may be developed. Key words: Amelanchier alnifolia, fruit size, shoot growth, cultivar evaluation, ripening
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".