Total Soluble Sugars Dynamics in Coffee Fruits Under Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) fruits are stronger sinks and is known its development may be more than four times higher than that allocated to branch growth during the annual production cycle. However, the origin and carbohydrates distribution used during the fruiting development are not yet known. Four assimilates sources are potentially available for fruit growth: (i) the photoassimilates produced by the fruit itself, (ii) branch reserves, (iii) leaf reserves and (iv) the current photosynthesis that occurs during fruit growth. To better understand the carbohydrate dynamics, its allocation in coffee fruits and to evaluate fruit dependence on other tree parts at the bean-filling stage, four carbohydrates sources were imposed in fully mature trees in Northeast of Sao Paulo State, Brazil. Variables such as total sugar and dry mass were analyzed. We observed that leaves from the nodes are very important for fruit development. Comparison between fruits with leaves and fruits without leaves clearly revealed its influence on dry matter and total sugars accumulation in the fruits. The removal or covering of leaves near fruits limits the development of fruit.
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) | 0.001 | 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".