MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1515199197 · doi:10.1002/jsfa.6073

Alveograph and Mixolab parameters associated with <i>Puroindoline‐D1</i> genes in Chinese winter wheats

2013· article· en· W1515199197 on OpenAlexaff
Feng Chen, Huanhuan Li, Xiangnan Li, Zhongdong Dong, Aihui Zuo, Xiaoli Shang, Dangqun Cui

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Science of Food and Agriculture · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTenacity (mineralogy)StarchAbsorption of waterMathematicsFood scienceBotanyChemistryBiologyMineralogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Grain texture is one of the most important characteristics of bread wheat and has a significant influence on end-use qualities. RESULTS: Forty-three Chinese cultivars were tested under three environments and used to characterise kernel hardness, Puroindoline-D1 alleles and Alveograph and Mixolab parameters. The results indicated that SKCS hardness was positively correlated with Alveograph tenacity and P/L and Mixolab protein weakening (C2) and water absorption and negatively correlated with Mixolab starch gelatinisation (C3), amylasic activity (C4) and starch gelling (C5). Variance analysis showed that Puroindoline-D1 had a significant impact on SKCS hardness and most Alveograph and Mixolab parameters. Furthermore, among three Puroindoline-D1 genotypes, PINA-null/Pinb-D1a possessed the highest SKCS hardness, Alveograph tenacity and W and Mixolab stability and water absorption but the lowest Alveograph extensibility and G and Mixolab C3, C4 and C5. Pina-D1a/Pinb-D1a had the lowest SKCS hardness, Alveograph tenacity and W and Mixolab C2, water absorption and stability but the highest Alveograph extensibility and G and Mixolab C3, C4 and C5. Pina-D1a/Pinb-D1b possessed the lowest Mixolab C2 - C1, C3 - C2, C4 - C3 and C5 - C4. CONCLUSION: Pina-D1a/Pinb-D1a was softer and had lower tenacity and water absorption. PINA-null/Pinb-D1a was harder and had higher tenacity and water absorption. Pina-D1a/Pinb-D1b had lower difference values among Mixolab parameters.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Science of Food and AgricultureSame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207