Fruit canopy positioning affects fruit calcium and potassium concentrations, disorder incidence, and fruit quality for ‘Honeycrisp’ apple
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One advantage of high-density apple orchard systems is homogeneity in fruit maturity and quality. However, even in modern orchard systems, variation in fruit quality occurs. ‘Honeycrisp’ apple is susceptible to numerous disorders including bitter pit, soft scald, and poor colour development. Heterogeneity in fruit quality and nutrient distribution can lead to variation in fruit storability. Here, we tested the effect of within-canopy position on fruit calcium and potassium concentrations, quality, and disorder development for fruit across nine representative high-density orchards. Calcium concentrations were greater in the upper part of the canopy compared with the lower part. Potassium was more evenly distributed within the canopy. Calcium concentrations and potassium-to-calcium ratios were significantly correlated with mean bitter pit incidence, which was between 20% and 30% in the lower half of the tree and <15% in the upper half. Fruit quality was significantly affected by the position in the canopy and was not constrained to only colour, but also other quality metrics such as dry matter, size, and firmness. Additionally, the internal ethylene concentrations (IECs) of fruit in the upper canopy were approximately 50% of the IECs for fruit from the lower canopy. With an increased emphasis on uniformity and predictability of fruit for long-term storage, these results underscore the importance of understanding variation within the canopy. Even for high-density systems, significant variation in fruit quality can occur and fruit from the upper canopy has lower disorder incidence and higher fruit quality than fruit from the lower canopy.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 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".