Fresh haskap berry postharvest quality characteristics and storage life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Haskap (Lonicera caerulea L.) is a relatively new berry crop in North America, and little research exists regarding its postharvest storage characteristics or storage life. Postharvest changes in berry quality, and principal factors limiting storage life at 1.1 °C and 95% relative humidity, were evaluated up to 14 days for three cultivars in 2019 and up to 28 days for six cultivars in 2020. Containerized berries were periodically assessed for soluble solids content (SSC), skin rupture force (SRF) (both 2019 and 2020) and flesh firmness, titratable acidity (TA), and Brix/acid ratio (B/A) (2020 only). External appearance was also evaluated both years, revealing berry shrivel as the primary factor negatively impacting visual appeal, followed distantly by low incidence of spoilage later in storage. All cultivars exhibited relatively constant postharvest SSC and decreasing SRF, flesh firmness, and TA (resulting in increasing B/A ratio). Postharvest quality differed slightly between years; relative SRF was consistent among cultivars while SSC was not. Some cultivars had a portion of shriveled berries at harvest, pointing to a need for cultivar-specific harvest indices. Mean days to slight shrivel for individual berries varied among cultivars evaluated, ranging from 7.5–21.9 d postharvest, with mean weight loss ranging from 1.2%–1.6% at this stage. Combined with group marketability estimates — set at a threshold of 10% severely shriveled berries — we estimate a storage life of 7–10 d for fresh haskaps. Additional research is needed to delineate maturation physiology and optimize harvest timing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".