MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7028008945

Effects of genotype and environment on the breadmaking quality of Canada Western Extra Strong Red Spring wheat cultivars

2001· dissertation· en· W7028008945 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2001
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiquePlant and animal studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCultivarInterimAgricultureGrain qualityQuality (philosophy)Spring (device)Gene–environment interactionPlant science
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In 1995, The Canadian Wheat Board established a collaborative working group of researchers from the Canadian Grain Commission's Grain Research Laboratory, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada's Cereal Research Centre, and the University of Manitoba's Department of Food Science to investigate the breadmaking quality of the CWES wheat class. The specific issues this group was to investigate the uniformity of cultivars within the class in terms of breadmaking quality, and the consistency of quality for each cultivar grown in different locations. In 1995, the CWES class comprised three registered cultivars, Glenlea (first licensed in 1972 as a Utility class wheat), Bluesky and Wildcat (both registered in l987). Descriptions of these three cultivars were published by Evans et al. (L972) and Clarke et al. (1994a and 1994b, respectively). In addition, the wheat line PT754, which had undergone three years of testing in the Parkland Wheat Co-operative Trial by the prairie Registration Recommending Committee for Grain, was expected to be registered. In 1996, PT754 received a three-year interim registration, and was given the name Laser, thus bringing the total number of cultivars in the cwES class to four. Buyers of CWES wheat expressed concern that the class was no longer performing as well as when Glenlea was the only cultivar within the class for various products, e.g. bread. It was suggested that one or more of the cultivars Bluesky, Wildcat and Laser possessed weaker dough properties compared to those of the established standard CWES wheat cultivar Glenlea. Further, it was not known whether the apparent differences in quality were genetic and/or environmental in nature. This thesis project was undertaken in 1997 to comprehensively examine these questions. CWES wheats are characteristically unique in dough physical properties and protein composition. The flour can be distinguished by very long dough mixing times and relatively high contents of so-called "unextractable" glutenin protein, i.e. glutenin of relatively high average molecular size. This wheat class was founded upon the cultivar Glenlea that was developed at the U of M and was originally licensed into the Canada Western Utility wheat class. In 1993, CWES became the new name of the wheat class to better reflect the functional quality of the cultivars within this class. Commercial interest in CWES wheat increased significantly in the 1990s as its gluten attributes became more widely known and studied. These attributes relate to its use as a blending wheat in a variety of applications where there is a need for increased gluten strength in the dough (Bushuk 1980). For example, to carry weaker and less costly wheats in white pan bread production, as a vital gluten replacer in whole wheat, high-fibre and hearth breads, and in frozen doughs to mitigate the damaging effects of extended freezing and thawing. This study evaluated a sample set of 36 flours derived from six different wheat genotypes- four CWES, and two CWRS- grown in six different locations in Saskatchewan and Alberta. The CWES genotypes were Glenlea, Bluesky, Wildcat, and Laser. The CWRS genotypes were Katepwa and Laura. The three objectives of the study were as follows: * To quantify genotypic differences in dough protein composition, dough mixing properties, and bread baking potential across locations * To similarly quantify the magnitude of location effects * To establish which tests (protein composition, mixing, and/or backing) best characterize the unique properties of CWES wheat.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
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 enseignants0,424
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,854

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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 Opus0,029
Tête enseignante GPT0,188
Écart entre enseignants0,159 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
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
Publié2001
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Même sujetPlant and animal studies→Travaux en français237 207→