Relocating Large Trees for Germplasm Conservation in Tree Fruit Breeding Programs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mature seedling trees of pear ( Pyrus communis and interspecific hybrids), and fruiting trees of peach and nectarine ( Prunus persica ), apricot ( Prunus armeniaca ), and pear were relocated during the dormant season using tree spades. During the growing season immediately following, some signs of drought stress were noticed but all trees grew well enough that they could be used as a source of budwood for limited propagation purposes. When drip irrigation was supplied, supplemented by overhead irrigation as required, normal growth and production resumed within two growing seasons of the move. Some tree losses (less than 10% of trees moved) were reported from one site where the soil type was Fox sand with very poor water holding capacity. These tree losses were attributed to an inadequate water supply to the root ball, even though the site was irrigated. Our experience has demonstrated the feasibility of relocating relatively large trees, which can be beneficial for germplasm conservation in a tree fruit breeding program. However, it is probably not economically viable to relocate such trees for commercial production.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it