MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4377022276 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2023-0024

Fire blight susceptibility of select cider apple cultivars

2023· article· en· W4377022276 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
John A. Cline, Amanda Beneff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsFire blightRootstockCultivarOrchardHorticultureBiologyBlightPEARMalusBotanyErwinia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is increasing interest in growing apple cultivars ( Malus domestica Borkh.) of European origin for the production of hard cider in Canada; however, little is known about their susceptibility to fire blight (FB). FB can spread rapidly through apple (and pear) orchards causing extensive tree mortality and economic loss. Twenty-eight promising cider cultivars were evaluated over a 7 year period, and in their seventh year of production they were severely naturally infected by an Erwinia amylovora outbreak causing FB. Herein, we report the bloom and harvest dates and tree mortality that developed largely as secondary shoot blight in the summer of 2021. Overall, the cultivars could be classified according to relative susceptibility to FB, based on percentage tree mortality after 7 years: Enterprise (0%); GoldRush and Porter’s Perfection (<20%); Binet Rouge, Kingston Black, Cline Russet, Dabinett, Grimes Golden, Frequin Rouge, Crimson Crisp®, Cox Orange Pippin, and Muscadet De Dieppe (20%–40%); Calville Blanc d’Hiver, Bramley’s Seedling, Yarlington Mill, Michelin, Bulmers Norman, Stoke Red, Golden Russet, Breakwell, Esopus Spitzenberg (50%–90%); Brown Snout, Medaille d’Or, Michelin, Brown’s Apple, Sweet Alford, Tydeman Late, Ashmead’s Kernel, and Tolman (90%–100%). This study highlights the importance of selecting FB tolerant cider cultivars and following best management orchard practices to reduce the spread and prevent infection, which can be achieved by using FB-resistant rootstock, controlling rootstock suckers, FB prediction models, and limited use of antibiotics, biologicals, and careful nitrogen application to regulate tree vigor.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant Science→Same topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases→French-language works237,207→