Evaluation of Packaging Materials for Transportation of Golden Delicious Apple
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies were carried out for two consecutive years (2013-2014) to identify appropriate packaging materials for transportation of Royal Delicious cultivar of apple. Fruits harvested on 3rd week of September were packed in different types of corrugated fiber board (CFB) boxes and transported from HRS, Rajikot, Jumla, Nepal (2390m a.s.l., 29017’ N, 82013’ E) to Kohalpur, Banke, Nepal (215 km mountainous gravel road, 48 hours) by truck. The treatments were 10 kg capacity 5 ply and 7 ply CFB boxes having 140 psi, 160 psi and 180 psi bursting strength. To compare with conventional and government recommended practices, the fruits were also packed in 3 ply Beer cartons (conventional practice) and 7 ply 20kg capacity CFB boxes (Government recommendation). The experiment was designed as eight treatments randomized completely with three replications. After transportation, fruits were stored as such condition in cold store at 5±1°C and 95% RH for one month. After storage, observations were made on physiological loss in weight (PLW), damage fruits, fruit quality and economic analysis. There was more than 40% reduction in PLW in all packaging treatments as compared to conventional one (4.4%). Similarly, highest postharvest loss (22.4%) was in conventional practice which was reduced to 6.6 to 16.9% in other treatments. Among the treatments, 7 ply 180 psi bursting strength CFB box was the best to retain fruit quality. Besides reduction in postharvest loss and better quality fruits, higher gross return, higher benefit cost ratio was received from the improved technology. The use of 7 ply 180 psi CFB boxes has an additional benefit of NRs. 78750 (US $ 757) per truckload load (5000 kg fruits). Higher cost of CFB boxes could be an important obstacle in adoption of improved technology; hence provision should be made from the government to subsidize for packaging materials to encourage adoption of improved technology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".