MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401277136 · doi:10.1002/ppp3.10557

How fruit moves: Crop systems, culture, and the making of the commercial blueberry, 1870–1930

2024· article· en· W4401277136 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePlants People Planet · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCropHorticultureAgroforestryBiologyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social Impact Statement The history of blueberries highlights the agroecological systems, multispecies relationships, and socioeconomic factors that shape eating habits and commercial availability of food. In the United States, an elaborate and lucrative human‐managed crop system evolved around so‐called wild blueberries in the late nineteenth‐century. Blueberry domestication under the auspices of public‐private collaboration in the early twentieth century then established the foundation for today's global blueberry trade. Wild blueberries continued to occupy specific economic niches, however, and an uneasy dynamic developed between locally revered Vaccinium species and the commercial “blueberry.” In an urbanizing world of people increasingly alienated from their food sources, blueberries provide a reminder of the intricate relationships between people and plants that shape both basic prospects of survival and specific ways of life, whether for good or for ill. Summary This work examines blueberries' emergence as a commercial product and how it grew out of a history that involved multiple Vaccinium species and their convoluted interactions with human ecologies. It outlines the agroecology of the wild blueberry trade in nineteenth‐ and early twentieth‐century Maine, followed by blueberries' domestication and expanded commercialization in the 1910s and 1920s through a public‐private collaboration between USDA scientist Frederick V. Coville and New Jersey cranberry grower Elizabeth C. White. The complexity of blueberries' path to becoming a global commodity underscores the significance of cultural factors in determining how a singular “blueberry” came to be defined in the first place. The article uses a range of sources to document blueberries' history of commercialization from the late nineteenth century to the present. In particular, local newspapers from Maine made it possible to reconstruct the agroecology of the wild blueberry trade in the state in the period prior to 1920, while a variety of government documents and agricultural journals provided the key means for exploring blueberries' domestication and commercialization in the 1910s and 1920s. The article delineates the main features of the agroecology that defined Maine's wild blueberry crop system and the public‐private relationship surrounding the domestication and commercialization of blueberry culture in New Jersey. These histories ultimately underscore the interplay between regional cultures, processes of commodification, and a nationalizing economy that came to define the blueberry as a product in the fresh fruit market of the United States. Public‐private collaborations, cultural discourses, and the evolving market relations that came with the globalization of blueberry culture in the late twentieth and early twenty‐first centuries continue to reflect trends established earlier in the twentieth century. The article concludes that the emergence of “the blueberry” as a singular commercial product embodies a set of systems and relationships between plant species and human societies that blurs the boundaries between wild and domesticated, ranges in scale from the local to the global, and preserves niches for localism within a global commercial landscape that itself contains multiple species underneath a veneer of standardization. Today's globalized fresh blueberry thus contains within itself a long and convoluted history of cultivation, plant breeding, competing crop systems, market relations, and cultural constructs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlants People PlanetSame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207