Bud dormancy pattern, chilling requirement, and cold hardiness in <i>Vitis vinifera</i> L. ‘Chardonnay’ and ‘Riesling’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, new vineyards have been established in southwestern Ontario. The open water of Lake Erie provides some winter protection for Vitis hybrids and winter-hardy Vitis vinifera L. cultivars in this area. However, winter damage is possible when vines are grown distant from the open water or when lakes are frozen. To better understand the risks to winter survival, the dormancy and chilling phenology were studied over three winters from 2013–2016. Ten dormant canes of two V. vinifera cultivars, ‘Chardonnay’ and ‘Riesling’, were collected weekly from 1 September until 30 March from the mature vines in a commercial vineyard located at St. Williams (Ontario). The canes defoliated in early October, and the endodormancy was completed by the end of December. The cumulative chilling hours (0–7.2 °C) from defoliation until the completion of endodormancy were averaged 606 hours for ‘Chardonnay’ and 665 hours for ‘Riesling’. ‘Chardonnay’ buds were slightly less hardy than ‘Riesling’ to cold temperatures, with a threshold of about −24 °C for ‘Chardonnay’ and −25 °C for ‘Riesling’. Most primary buds of both cultivars died after 16 February 2015, and more than half died after 12 February 2014, due to severe low temperatures of −33.1 and −26 °C, respectively.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".