Abscisic acid form, concentration, and application timing influence phenology and bud cold hardiness in Merlot grapevines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of abscisic acid (ABA) form, concentration, and application timing on bud cold hardiness, phenology, and fruiting performance of Merlot grapevines (Vitis vinifera) were evaluated in a three-year field trial with site locations in British Columbia and Ontario, Canada, and in Washington and Idaho, United States. Solutions containing natural S-ABA (ABAN) and a purported long-lived ABA analogue 8'-acetylene ABA (ABAA) at differing concentrations were applied to the vine canopy at veraison or post-harvest. Postharvest foliar applications of ABAN at concentrations greater than or equal to 5000 ppm tended to advance leaf abscission and increase autumn bud cold hardiness. Postharvest foliar applications of ABAA at 1000 ppm tended to delay budbreak in the spring following application and increase spring bud cold hardiness. Fruit yield and basic composition were affected little by the ABA treatments. Bud hardiness was enhanced by ABAN mostly in autumn and by ABAA mostly in the spring, indicating that the suitability of ABA forms for reducing bud damage would depend on when injurious cold events are more likely.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".