MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167407040 · doi:10.5539/jps.v2n2p113

Comparative Study of Apple Cultivars Bred in Holovousy, Czech Republic

2013· article· en· W2167407040 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. Blažek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plant Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrchardCultivarPowdery mildewHorticultureRootstockVenturia inaequalisHectareCanopyPruningBiologyMathematicsBotanyFungicide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an experimental orchard, 14 apple cultivars bred in Holovousy and registered in the Czech Republic during 1994-2011 have been evaluated for 12 years in comparison with four standard ones most commonly grown here. Trees were planted on M9 rootstock in the spacing of 4 x 1 m and trained like spindles. Zuzana cv had the most vigorous trees. which was followed by Primadela and Resista. On the contrary, Selena had the smallest canopy, followed by Rubinstep, Vyso?ina and Julia. Regarding disease performance Primadela, Resista, Selena, Starkresa and Vyso?ina were entirely resistant to apple scab (Venturia inaequalis). Another three, Julia, Angold and Produkta were rated as highly tolerant to the disease. The highest levels of tolerance to powdery mildew were recorded on Meteor, Nabella and on the standard cultivar Rubin. Occurrence of fruit rot was very negligible on Starkresa, Benet, Vyso?ina and Meteor. The most productive was Rucla with a mean year harvest equal to 34.4 tons per hectare. In decreasing order, it was followed by Nabella, Resista, Produkta, Primadela, Angold and Vysocina, all of which were better than the standard ones. Regarding fruit size the largest one was Meteor followed by Jonagold, Angold, Benet and Nabella. The cultivar that was first in taste was Rucla, followed by Benet, Rubín, Rubinstep, Starkresa and Meteor.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plant StudiesSame topicPlant Physiology and Cultivation StudiesFrench-language works237,207