Crop load and harvest date have minimal impact on bud cold hardiness and cane carbohydrate levels of four grapevine cultivars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four grapevine cultivars ('Pinot gris', 'Riesling', 'Cabernet franc', 'Cabernet Sauvignon') were subjected to six different field treatments in 2011 [two crop loads (full, half) X three harvest dates [normal (T0), 3 weeks after T0, 6 weeks after T0] in a randomized block design with a factorialized treatment arrangement. All treatments were sampled four times over the 2012 dormant season from January to March. Bud cold hardiness was evaluated for all four cultivars by measuring low temperature exotherms (LTEs) of dormant buds using differential thermal analysis. Cane carbohydrates (CHOs) were likewise analyzed in 'Pinot gris' and 'Riesling'. CHO analysis was done using an 80 % ethanol extraction and HPLC. Neither CHO levels nor cold hardiness were substantially affected by either crop level or harvest date. Consistent patterns of CHO changes and LTE values in each cultivar indicated that deacclimation was unaffected by treatment. Cold hardiness may be influenced more by cultivar specificity based on rates of maturation than by treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".