MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1584079741 · doi:10.1139/g10-080

Analysis of yield and oil from a series of canola breeding trials. Part II. Exploring variety by environment interaction using factor analysisThis article is one of a selection of papers from the conference “Exploiting Genome-wide Association in Oilseed Brassicas: a model for genetic improvement of major OECD crops for sustainable farming”.

2010· article· en· W1584079741 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
B. R. Cullis, Alison Smith, Cameron Beeck, Wallace A. Cowling

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetics and Plant Breeding
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGrains Research and Development Corporation
KeywordsBiplotGene–environment interactionVariety (cybernetics)Selection (genetic algorithm)Context (archaeology)BiologyMachine learningComputer scienceData scienceData miningBiotechnologyArtificial intelligenceGeneticsGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exploring and exploiting variety by environment (V × E) interaction is one of the major challenges facing plant breeders. In paper I of this series, we presented an approach to modelling V × E interaction in the analysis of complex multi-environment trials using factor analytic models. In this paper, we develop a range of statistical tools which explore V × E interaction in this context. These tools include graphical displays such as heat-maps of genetic correlation matrices as well as so-called E-scaled uniplots that are a more informative alternative to the classical biplot for large plant breeding multi-environment trials. We also present a new approach to prediction for multi-environment trials that include pedigree information. This approach allows meaningful selection indices to be formed either for potential new varieties or potential parents.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.154 · 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

Citations120
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicGenetics and Plant BreedingFrench-language works237,207