MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2310680906 · doi:10.21273/horttech.25.4.536

Nonstructural Carbohydrate Concentrations in Dormant Grapevine Scionwood and Rootstock Impact Propagation Success and Vine Growth

2015· article· en· W2310680906 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nathan Phillips, Andrew G. Reynolds, Frederick Di Profio

Bibliographic record

VenueHortTechnology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRaffinoseStachyoseFructoseSucroseRootstockStarchSugarCultivarShootHorticultureBotanyMonosaccharideWine grapeChemistryGraftingBiologyFood scienceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives of this study were to quantify starch and soluble sugar concentrations in wine grape ( Vitis sp . ) scionwood and rootstock material, and to examine relationships between carbohydrate (CHO) metrics and both grafting success and shoot growth. CHOs of three wine grape scionwood cultivars [Merlot and Riesling ( Vitis vinifera ) and Vidal blanc ( Vitis sp.)] harvested from four separate vineyards in the Niagara Peninsula in Ontario were analyzed for starch, total CHOs, total sugars, sucrose, monosaccharides (glucose, fructose), and oligosaccharides (raffinose, stachyose) to determine if CHO differences existed between scionwood cultivar and site, and whether these impacted propagation success when grafted to two different rootstocks [‘3309 Couderc’ (3309) and ‘101-14 Millardet et de Grasset’ (101-14) ( V. riparia × V. rupestris )]. Differences in CHOs existed between vineyards for all cultivars, and their relationship with propagation success was most evident with ‘Vidal blanc’. Differences were also observed between sites for some cultivars in terms of grafting success and shoot length of grafted vines. Hot water treatment (HWT) of rootstock increased total sugars, glucose, fructose, and stachyose in 3309, and led to lower starch, total CHOs, and higher sucrose in 101-14 when measured immediately following HWT. At time of grafting, HWT 3309 had lower starch sucrose and raffinose, and higher glucose, fructose, and total sugars compared with non-HWT material, whereas HWT 101-14 contained lower total sugars, raffinose, and sucrose and higher stachyose and glucose. Stachyose, raffinose, sucrose, glucose, fructose, and total sugars in scionwood at time of grafting were correlated with propagation success. However, CHOs at time of scionwood collection in February did not correlate to successful propagation. Relationships between scion viability of all cultivars vs. stachyose and total sugars for both rootstocks suggested a possible relationship between these CHO metrics and propagation success. Differences likewise existed between propagation success on rootstocks 3309 and 101-14 on most occasions with 3309 displaying higher percent scion viability and shoot growth. This may be of particular importance in grafting difficult-to-propagate rootstock cultivars.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHortTechnologySame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207