MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1508092038

Breeding for Cold Tolerance in Chickpea

2009· article· en· W1508092038 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. K. Chaturvedi, Divya Mishra, Priyanka Vyas, Neelu Mishra

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Biosciences/Trends in biosciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetic and Environmental Crop Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCropLegumeAgronomyBiologyProductivityCold stressNon-invasive ventilationCrop yieldForensic scienceYield (engineering)InsomniaCrop productionBiotechnologyAgricultureEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), a winter season crop, is the 4th largest grain-legume crop in the world. In India, among various grain legumes grown chickpea ranks 1st covering 8.25 m ha area during 2008-09. Being a cool-season crop, chickpea faces low temperature to the tune of 0-5°C for about 15-20 days in the northern states. The sensitivity of varieties at flowering to chilling temperature below 10°C has adverse effect on chickpea production (15-20% yield losses). The development of varieties possessing cold/low temperature tolerance is viable option for enhancing chickpea production and productivity in low temperature environments of countries like India, Canada and Australia. In present paper, attempts have been made to define cold/low temperature stress in relation to chickpea for different growing environments/countries. Various screening techniques and scoring index in vogue, availability of donors, genetics of cold tolerance, different aspects of varieties development including problems and prospects have been discussed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in Biosciences/Trends in biosciencesSame topicGenetic and Environmental Crop StudiesFrench-language works237,207