MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2277214732 · doi:10.5539/jas.v8n3p88

Assessment and Physico-Chemical Characterization of Fruits from Different Tucuma Palm Tree Accesses for Keeping Their Preservation in Central Amazonia

2016· article· en· W2277214732 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kaoru Yuyama, Jaime Paiva Lopes Aguiar, Bianca Galúcio Pereira Araújo, E. C. S. Coelho

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotanical Research and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyAmazon rainforestPalmFlavorPopulationHorticultureBotanyFood scienceEcologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Fruit from the Amazonian tucuma tree (Astrocaryum aculeatum Meyer) is almost entirely randomly extracted and thus, it holds a wide genetic variability, which diminishes its evenness besides several characteristics like pleasant flavor and thick pulp so appreciated when it comes to be consumed by humans. This fact is associated to the reproductive system, since it is a cross-pollinating plant. The present work assessed nine tucuma fruit accesses in Manaus, BR-174, Rio Preto da Eva and Vila do Equador, Rorainópolis Township, following the producers’ fruit preference indication. Simple correlation analysis indicates lipid content to be independent from the assessed characters, since it correlated to none of them. Therefore, the population formed from the selected accesses (BR 174, Jundiá 1, Manaus 1, Manaus 2), based on flavor, pulp thickness, yield and lipid content, will have a great chance of obtaining more uniform fruits that will please the consumers’ taste.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicBotanical Research and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207