Physiological responses of four apple (<i>Malus</i> × <i>domestica</i> Borkh.) rootstock genotypes to soil water deficits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of drought-tolerant rootstocks is an important strategy in maintaining orchard productivity while meeting the increasing need to conserve water resources. The drought tolerance of two new genotypes, Vineland 1 (V.1) and Vineland 3 (V.3), was assessed along with industry standards to test the hypothesis that differences in water-use efficiency exist among these apple rootstocks. One-year-old, non-grafted nursery liners of M.9, MM.111, V.1, and V.3 were grown in a controlled-environment experiment. Plants of each genotype were maintained water-replete or were subjected to a 9-d controlled dry down and then maintained under water stress conditions for 55 d. Water stress reduced biomass accumulation and trunk cross-sectional area for all four genotypes. The two vigorous genotypes, MM.111 and V.1, increased their root-to-shoot ratios in response to water stress, whereas the root-to-shoot ratios of M.9 and V.3 remained unchanged in their water-replete controls. Genotype V.3 maintained its transpiration at a significantly lower soil water content compared to M.9, MM.111, and V.1. Of the four genotypes, V.3 demonstrated a high tolerance to water stress conditions, and therefore deserves further investigation using grafted apple trees in an orchard study.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".