MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2183580225 · doi:10.21273/hortsci.37.1.139

Storage Characteristics of New Sweet Cherry Cultivars

2002· article· en· W2183580225 on OpenAlexafffund
Frank Kappel, P.M.A. Toivonen, D.-L. McKenzie, S. Stan

Bibliographic record

VenueHortScience · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaWashington State University
KeywordsCultivarBrowningPrunusHorticultureRespiration rateBiologyRespirationCold storageControlled atmosphereBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several sweet cherry ( Prunus avium L.) cultivars were stored in air or modified-atmosphere packages (MAP) at 1 °C for 2 or 4 weeks, respectively. The new cultivars included `Santina', `Sumpaca Celeste', `Sumnue Cristalina', `Sumste Samba', `Sandra Rose', `Sumleta Sonata', and `Skeena', and the standards were `Lapins', `Sweetheart', and `Bing'. Fruit were rated for defects (stem browning, stem shrivel and fruit surface pitting), and fruit quality at harvest and after storage. Weight loss during storage was influenced by year, storage treatment, and cultivar. Stem shrivel, stem browning, and fruit surface pitting varied among cultivars and years. Generally, fruit stored in MAP had higher fruit firmness than at harvest or when stored in air. The respiration rate of fruit was lower in later than in earlier maturing cultivars, but respiration rate at harvest was not related to any of the quality measurements taken after storage.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations88
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHortScienceSame topicPlant Physiology and Cultivation StudiesFrench-language works237,207