MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344482956 · doi:10.21273/hortsci.35.3.402d

081 New Hardy Apple Selections from the Quebec Apple Breeding Program

2000· article· en· W2344482956 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shahrokh Khanizadeh, Yvon Groleau, Jennifer R. DeEll, J. Cousineau, R. L. Granger, Gilles Rousselle

Bibliographic record

VenueHortScience · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHorticultureFleshBiologyGeneral partnershipBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of the Québec apple breeding program are to develop hardy and disease-resistant varieties for the production of juice and cider and/or varieties with an excellent fruit quality and long shelf-life. Almost 90% of the research in apple breeding is funded by a Partnership Program , in which the partners cover ≈50% of the research costs. The short-term objectives of the program are to evaluate the existing genotypes at the AAFC Frelighsburg sub-station and name worthy selections, remove unworthy material, and transfer potentially interesting genotypes to other AAFC research stations for further evaluations. Three selections—SJC7713-1, SJC686-1, and O-5410—are very hardy, scab-resistant, and have good yields of pleasantly flavored fruit, which can be stored long-term while retaining good quality. Selections SJCA14R3A108 and SJCA36R7A87 are not scab-resistant, but they are hardy, and the fruit have an excellent flavor, store very well for >5 months, and have a flesh that does not darken after cutting. The above selections are currently being evaluated for use by commercial growers. Selections SJC7172-1 and SJC7911-1, along with four crabapple genotypes, are of potential interest to home gardeners.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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