The Effects of Spent Flower Removal on Reblooming and Branching Architecture and the Characterization of Floral Heat Tolerance of Garden Roses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spent flower removal is commonly practiced on remontant garden roses as a landscape management tool to hasten rebloom. To study the effects of spent flower removal on the reblooming and branching architecture of garden roses, four Shrub rose cultivars were established in the field in February 2019 and treatments were started in June 2019 at Somerville and Overton with the same treatments and controls in each cultivar. Spent flower removal had no effect on the days to rebloom between flushes of flowering. ‘Belinda’s Dream’ had the longest reblooming period. The current season growth and primary shoot number were not affected by spent flower removal. Plants in Somerville exhibited a higher number of secondary and tertiary shoots than in Overton regardless of cultivar and more quaternary shoots on some cultivars than those in Overton. This is likely attributable to the longer growing season in Somerville than in Overton.\n \nAn important aspect of heat tolerance of ornamental plants is the response of the flowers to high temperature. Commercial garden rose cultivars with buds 4 mm in diameter were exposed to temperatures of 36, 40, or 44 ˚C for durations of 1, 3, or 5 h in factorial combination in a heat chamber and compared to untreated controls to determine the effects of heat on floral parameters including petal number, flower diameter and flower dry weight when flowers were fully open. The number of treatments different from the control determined using Dunnett’s test and the parameters affected by the temperature × duration factors as determined by ANOVA were used to categorize the cultivars studied.\n\nDry weight was the most sensitive parameter measured. ‘CHEwnicebell’ and ‘ZLEMarianne Yoshida’ were categorized as Heat Sensitive cultivars, ‘Winnipeg Parks’ was categorized as Moderately Heat Susceptible. ‘Morden Blush’, ‘Meipeporia’ and ‘RADrazz’ was considered as Moderately Heat Tolerant cultivars. ‘RADtko’ and ‘RIPhud’ were not affected by the heat treatments and were categorized as Heat Tolerant cultivars. Exposure of plants with buds 4 mm in diameter to 44 ˚C for 3 or 5h was the most effective treatment for determining floral heat tolerance for the cultivars studied.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".