MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Certified clone and powdery mildew impact rotundone in red wine from <i>Vitis vinifera L.</i> cv. Duras N

2015· article· en· W2395434915 on OpenAlex
Olivier Geffroy, Olivier Yobrégat, Thierry Dufourcq, Tracey Siebert, Éric Serrano

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOENO One · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFrance AgriMerAlberta Water Research Institute
KeywordsAromaclone (Java method)HorticulturePowdery mildewWineVitis viniferaChemistryBotanyFood scienceBiologyBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Aim</strong>: Few recent studies have been investigating the effect of clone on aroma compounds. The aim of this research work was to study the impact of certified clones from <em>Vitis vinifera </em>L. cv. Duras N on grape quality and rotundone, a sesquiterpene responsible for peppery aroma which has been reported recently in red wines made from this cultivar.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Methods and results</strong>: The experimental site consisted of four consecutive rows, each row planted with one of the four certified clones of Duras N (554, 555, 627 and 654). For each clone, measurements were replicated on three experimental units per row. Each experimental unit consisted of twelve continuous vines. Rotundone concentration was measured in wines prepared by microvinification techniques (1-L Erlenmeyer flasks). For both vintages of study, rotundone concentrations were significantly higher in wines from clones 554 and 654 in comparison with clone 555, while clone 627 showed an intermediate level. In 2014, differences in powdery mildew (PM) severity on clusters were identified between the four clones and a positive logarithmic correlation (r<sup>2</sup> = 0.58) was reported on the experimental site between rotundone in wines and PM severity on grapes.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Conclusion</strong>: Our results found differences in rotundone concentrations in wines made from the four Duras N certified clones. The results also suggested that grapevine defence response to PM could enhance rotundone production in berries. Clonal differences in susceptibility to biotic stress, such as PM, might explain the differences observed in rotundone concentrations between the four studied clones.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Significance and impact of the study</strong>: Our results may assist grape growers to produce high quality wines with a desired aroma attribute made from Duras N. One should consider planting clone 554 in order to promote high levels of rotundone in wines made from this cultivar.</p>

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.212 · 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