MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3134091087 · doi:10.22067/jcesc.2020.37139.0

Evaluation of Quantitative and Qualitative Characteristics of New Quinoa Genotypes in Spring Cultivation at Karaj

2020· article· en· W3134091087 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiqueSeed and Plant Biochemistry
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSpring (device)AgronomyGenotypeBiologyEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Wild) is native to the Andean region of South America. Various genotypes of quinoa have a high diversity regarding different traits such as sensitivity to daylength, seed size and color, nutritional and anti - nutritional value of seeds, tolerance to biological and non - nutritional stresses. Considering the development goals of the quinoa, the need for new genotypes is very tangible. Fortunately, new genotypes of quinoa have become available that have not been studied domestically. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of these genotypes and to study their compatibility with spring cultivation in Karaj region. The results of this study provide the basis for deciding the next steps of research and development on these genotypes. Materials and Methods In this study, 13 new genotypes of quinoa including Atlas, EQ 101, EQ 102, EQ103, EQ104, EQ105, EQ106, Amiralla Marangani, Amiralla Sacaca, Blanka Dejunine, Kancolla, Salsada Inia and Rosada De Huncaya, have been studied in a randomized complete block design with three replications for two years (2018-2019) at Seed and Plant Improvement Institute, Karaj. Genotypes with the prefix EQ were obtained from Canada, Atlas genotype from the Netherlands and the rest of the genotypes from Peru. Each plot consisted of three rows with 500 cm length and 60 cm × 10 cm of plant density. The distances between replications and planting plots per replication were 180 cm and 200 cm. Data were analyzed using SAS software and means were compared using the least significant difference (LSD) at the 5% level (P = 0.05). Results and Discussion The results showed that all traits except days to germination were significantly affected by genotype. However, plant height, inflorescence length, stem diameter, oil percentage and days to maturity did not affect by genotype interaction per year. The effect of year was also significant for grain yield, days to pollination, saponin content and oil percentage. Different origin (from Peru, Canada and the Netherlands) and different morphological characteristics of the studied genotypes caused significant differences in different traits. The EQ101 genotype, showed the highest grain yield and plant height, highest protein content and the lowest amount of saponin. While Marangani genotype with an average yield of 796.78 kg ha-1 had the lowest yield. EQ103 was the earliest and Marangani, Kancolla, Rosada and Salsada genotype were the late genotypes, respectively. On the other hand, EQ105 genotype revealed the highest seed oil content. Marangani genotype had the thickest shoot among all genotypes. Canadian Genotypes have lower levels of saponin than Peruvian genotypes. EQ101 with saponin content of 0.48 mg g-1 (0.04%) had the lowest saponin content and among the studied genotypes in this study, it is the only genotype that belong to sweet quinoa cultivars. Conclusions The studied genotypes demonstrated significant diversity and differences in all studied traits. In some traits, the difference between the two groups of genotypes (Canadian or Peruvian) was quite obvious. In this study all quinoa genotypes were compatible with spring cultivation in Karaj region. Genotypes compatible with spring (long day) cultivation usually do not have a problem with summer and autumn cultivation and will most likely be cultivated in all seasons and regions of the country.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,596
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,519
Tête enseignante GPT0,561
Écart entre enseignants0,042 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Même sujetSeed and Plant BiochemistryTravaux en français237 207