MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

IMPACT OF CLIMATE FACTORS ON YIELD AND QUALITY OF VINE VARIETY CABERNET SAUVIGNON IN PODGORICA WINE GROWING REGION

2016· article· en· W2473126907 on OpenAlexaff
Tatjana Popović, S. Mijovic, Danijela Raičević, R. Pajovic

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal Agriculture and Forestry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVineWineYield (engineering)TerroirQuality (philosophy)Wine grapeGrape wineVariety (cybernetics)Crop yieldAgronomyHorticultureEnvironmental scienceBiologyMathematicsFood scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of climatic factors on grape yield, grape cluster weight, sugar and acidity content in stum in variety Cabernet Sauvignon was measured in period from 2011 to 2013 at the experimental field of Biotechnical Faculty in Podgorica.The study was conducted in the vineyard of the Biotechnical Faculty in Podgorica in the stage of full grape maturity.The highest grape yield as well as the cluster weight were measured in 2012 (1.2 kg/m 2 and 125 g respectively), while the lowest values were measured in 2013 -0.88 kg/m 2 and 92 g.Highest sugar content in stum was measured in 2011, and lowest in 2013.The highest acid content was measured in 2013 (6.50 g/l) as a result of heavy rainfall during the growing season, especially in August and September.Differences between the studied parameters were statistically significant.The results showed that the yield and quality of grapes were in direct relation with the weather conditions in certain years of experiments.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal Agriculture and ForestrySame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207