Differences in Fruit Development among Large- and Small-fruited Cultivars of Saskatoon (Amelanchier alnifolia)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fruit growth in saskatoons ( Amelanchier alnifolia Nutt.), an emerging horticultural crop across the Canadian prairies, results from development of the mesocarp and the endocarp-locular-ovular structure which includes the developing seeds. Contribution of these tissues to fruit size was assessed using transverse sections of ovaries sampled at six developmental stages among large- and small-fruited cultivars. Mesocarp development was similar among the larger-fruited cultivars (Thiessen, Northline, and Smoky); the number of cells increased rapidly through Stage I [162 to 293 growing degree days (GDDs)] of fruit growth, and cell number increase was minimal during Stages II (293 to 577 GDDs) and III (577 to 747 GDDs). In `Regent' fruit (a small-fruited cultivar), the maximal rate of cell division was delayed until Stage II and the mesocarp contained fewer cells than the larger-fruited cultivars at harvest maturity. Mesocarp cell enlargement was similar among all of the cultivars studied where cell expansion was maximal during Stage I and continued at a slower rate during Stages II and III. The area of the endocarp-locular-ovular structure was greatest for `Thiessen' and `Northline', midrange for `Smoky', and smallest for `Regent'. Data suggest that a minimum number of mesocarp cells early in fruit development is required to attain maximal mesocarp size, and that differences in cultivar fruit size are a function of both the mesocarp and the endocarp-locular-ovular structure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".