Biochemical and Gene Expression Involved in Red Blush Color Development in ‘Ambrosia’ Apple
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The market value of the apple ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) cultivar Ambrosia is closely linked to the characteristic blush on the skin surface. For ‘Ambrosia’ orchards that produce consistently low levels of surface blush, the implementation of reflective rowcovering has improved surface coloration, but the reflected wavebands responsible for this enhanced color production have not been confirmed. This study consisted of two separate experiments: one conducted in the field to confirm reflective rowcovering efficacy and the other in a controlled environment cabinet to determine which waveband was enhancing red blush production. The red blush production in orchards with and without reflective rowcovering was then directly compared with the red blush produced on the surface of apples that were poorly colored at harvest and then exposed to visible, fluorescent, ultraviolet A (UVA), or ultraviolet B (UVB) light sources within the controlled environment chamber. Consequent analysis of the red blush color within the Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage a* and b* color space was conducted to evaluate the quality of the red blush pigment under each treatment in the field and the controlled environment chamber. The analysis revealed that the red blush that developed on apples from the reflective rowcover treatment most closely matched the red blush that developed in response to UVB exposure in the controlled environment cabinet. Further analysis of gene expression and anthocyanin contents in the ‘Ambrosia’ apples support the hypothesis that the primary driver for the characteristic red blush development, when reflective rowcovers are used, is increased exposure to UVB light.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".