Early Performance of ‘Honeycrisp’ Apple Trees onSeveral Size-Controlling Rootstocks in the 2014 NC-140 RootstockTrial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2014, a multi-year orchard experiment of apple Malus domestica(Borkh) was established at 14 locations in Canada, Mexico, and the United States using ‘Honeycrisp’ as the scion. Seventeen dwarf and semi-dwarf rootstock genotypes were tested, specifically: Budagovsky.10 (B.10), the Cornell-Geneva rootstocks G.11, G.202, G.214, G.30, G.41, G.890, G.935, G.969, the Malling rootstocks M.7, MM.106, and the Vineland rootstocks V.1, V.5, V.6, and V.7. The industry standard Malling rootstocks M.26 EMLA and M.9-T337 were included for comparison purposes. Tree mortality, trunk cross-sectional area, tree canopy size, amount of rootstock suckering, yield, and fruit number were measured annually. All measured parameters were influenced by location and rootstock, and the interaction of these two factors was significant. Overall, after five years and averaged over all locations, G.11 and G.41 were 6% smaller and 5% larger, respectively, than M.9-T337. G.935 and B.10 were 9% and 5% smaller, respectively, than M.26 EMLA, whereas G.214 and G.969 were 3% and 10% larger, respectively. V.1 and G.30 were 52% and 60% larger, respectively, than M.26 EMLA, whereas V.7, G.890, V.6, and V.5 were the largest genotypes in the trial, ranging from 77-95% larger than M.26 EMLA. G.202 performance was unusual and therefore was omitted from data analysis. Generally, cumulative yields per tree were greater on trees with the highest vigor. On average, 10 of the 16 rootstocks produced higher yields than M.9-T337 and M.26 EMLA; the newer rootstocks B.10, V.5, V.6, V.7 and all of the Geneva series rootstocks, with the exception of G.41, had cumulative yields that exceeded M.9-T337 and M.26 EMLA. Averaged over all locations, cumulative yield efficiency was greatest for G.935, G.214, M.9-T337, G.11, G.890, and G.969. Overall, the strong rootstock by location interaction on cumulative yield observed in this trial illustrates the importance of testing rootstocks at a regional level. These results are only reflective of the orchard establishment years; additional research must be completed before apple producers can make more informed decisions concerning rootstock selection for their orchard training systems and planting locations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".