Rootstock Effects on Growth and Quality of `Gala' Apples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of rootstock on apple size is not clear due to inconsistent results of published studies. This study was conducted over 3 years at the Peninsular Agricultural Research Station near Sturgeon Bay, WI on 6-year-old `Gala' apple trees ( Malus domestica Borkh) grafted on Malling 26 (M.26), Ottawa 3, M.9 Pajam 1, and Vineland (V)-605 rootstocks. Fruit diameter was measured weekly. Fruit weight and volume were estimated by a quadratic regression of weekly measurements. Fruit weight was positively correlated with fruit volume. Rootstock had no effect on fruit growth and final size even with the removal of crop load effects. Crop load was a highly significant covariate for fruit size, but canopy light interception and seed count were not. Trees on M.26 EMLA had slightly higher yield in 2000 but rootstock did not affect yield efficiency any year. Rootstock had no influence on fruit quality attributes during 2001; however, in 2002, fruit obtained from trees on Pajam-1 tended to be less firm. Generally, apple fruit size was influenced by crop load and other factors, but not by rootstock.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".