MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2383566033 · doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.6b01013

Impact of Leaf Removal, Applied Before and After Flowering, on Anthocyanin, Tannin, and Methoxypyrazine Concentrations in ‘Merlot’ (<i>Vitis vinifera</i> L.) Grapes and Wines

2016· article· en· W2383566033 on OpenAlexafffund
Paolo Sivilotti, José Herrera, Klemen Lisjak, Helena Baša Česnik, Paolo Sabbatini, E. Peterlunger, Simone D. Castellarin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundMinistero dell'Economia e delle FinanzeUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsAnthocyaninVitis viniferaTanninBerryCondensed tanninHorticultureBotanyChemistryProanthocyanidinBiologyPolyphenolOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development and accumulation of secondary metabolites in grapes determine wine color, taste, and aroma. This study aimed to investigate the effect of leaf removal before flowering, a practice recently introduced to reduce cluster compactness and Botrytis rot, on anthocyanin, tannin, and methoxypyrazine concentrations in 'Merlot' grapes and wines. Leaf removal before flowering was compared with leaf removal after flowering and an untreated control. No effects on tannin and anthocyanin concentrations in grapes were observed. Both treatments reduced levels of 3-isobutyl-2-methoxypyrazine (IBMP) in the grapes and the derived wines, although the after-flowering treatment did so to a greater degree in the fruit specifically. Leaf removal before flowering can be used to reduce cluster compactness, Botrytis rot, and grape and wine IBMP concentration and to improve wine color intensity but at the expense of cluster weight and vine yield. Leaf removal after flowering accomplishes essentially the same results without loss of yield.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations84
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207