The Performance of Four Vineland Apple Rootstocks inBritish Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The horticultural performance of ‘8S6923’ (Aurora Golden Gala™) apple on M.9 EMLA and V.1, V.2, V.3 and V.4 (Vineland) rootstocks was evaluated for 8 years in Summerland, B.C., Canada. The trees were planted in 2003 and trained as vertical axes on a post and wire trellis. Tree vigor fell into three groups based on trunk cross-sectional area, where V.4 > V. 1, V.2 > V.3, M.9 EMLA. Trees on V.4 were also significantly taller and had wider canopies than trees on the other rootstocks. No tree mortality occurred. The cumulative number of root suckers on V.1, V.2 and V.3 was significantly lower than on V.4 or M.9 EMLA. Precocity (based on counts of flower clusters in the second leaf) was highest for M.9 EMLA, whilst trees on V.4 had no blossoms at all. The latter finding is noteworthy because the scion cultivar is normally extremely precocious. Cumulative yield was proportional to tree size. Cumulative yield efficiency was highest for V.3 and M.9 EMLA. In comparison to M.9 EMLA, V.3 was similar in most respects, and it produced fewer root suckers, but it did reduce scion fruit size by about 5%. V. 1 and V.2 were both semi-dwarfing under the conditions of this trial, and they also reduced fruit size slightly relative to M.9 EMLA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".