MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626827841 · doi:10.21273/hortsci10761-16

Modeling the Effect of Preharvest Weather Conditions on the Incidence of Soggy Breakdown in ‘Honeycrisp’ Apples

2017· article· en· W2626827841 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Maude Lachapelle, Gaétan Bourgeois, Jennifer R. DeEll, Katrine A. Stewart, Philippe Séguin

Bibliographic record

VenueHortScience · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsPreharvestGrowing seasonHorticultureCultivarEnvironmental scienceBiologyAgronomyPostharvest

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

‘Honeycrisp’ is a relatively new apple cultivar highly susceptible to physiological disorders, such as soggy breakdown. The overall objective of this study was to identify preharvest weather parameters that influence the incidence of soggy breakdown over the different phases of fruit development. Using weather data and evaluation of fruit quality from three sites in Ontario, two sites in Quebec, and one site in Nova Scotia from 2009 to 2011, and data from four sites in Ontario from 2002 to 2006, a model for soggy breakdown incidence (SBI) was developed to predict the level of susceptibility in ‘Honeycrisp’ apples. This model uses primarily two weather variables during the last phase of fruit development [91 days from full bloom (DFB) to harvest] to accumulate an SBI index during the growing season, from full bloom to harvest. Cool (temperature <5 °C) and wet conditions (precipitation >0.5 mm) during this last phase resulted in increased soggy breakdown susceptibility levels. The predictions of the SBI model resulted in 68% of well-estimated cases (threshold of ±5%) (RMSE = 6.45, EF = 0.28, E = −0.04). Furthermore, firmness was linked to soggy breakdown, in addition to weather conditions, revealing a positive effect of high firmness at harvest on the development of the disorder. However, the effect of fruit quality attributes (e.g., internal ethylene concentration, starch index, firmness, and soluble solid content) by themselves, without considering weather conditions, revealed no relationship with the incidence of soggy breakdown.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHortScienceSame topicPlant Physiology and Cultivation StudiesFrench-language works237,207