MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963820204 · doi:10.1021/jf049291b

Imaging Molecular Chemistry of Pioneer Corn

2004· article· en· W1963820204 on OpenAlexafffund
Peiqiang Yu, J. J. McKinnon, Colleen Christensen, David A. Christensen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Light Source (Canada)University of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synchrotron Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) microspectroscopy as a rapid, direct, and nondestructive analytical technique can explore molecular chemical features of the microstructure of biological samples. The objective of this study was to use synchrotron FTIR microspectroscopy to image the molecular chemistry of corn (cv. Pioneer 39P78) to reveal spatial intensity and distribution of chemical functional groups in corn tissue. This experiment was performed at the U2B station of the National Synchrotron Light Source in Brookhaven National Laboratory (NSLS-BNL, Upton, NY). The Pioneer corn tissue was imaged from the pericarp, seed coat, aleurone, and endosperm under peaks at 1736 (carbonyl C=O ester), 1510 (aromatic compound), 1650 (amide I), 1550 (amide II), 1246 (cellulosic material), 1160 (CHO), 1150 (CHO), 1080 (CHO), 929 (CHO), 860 (CHO), 3350 (OH and NH stretching), 2929 (CH(2) stretching band), and 2885 cm(-1) (CH(3) stretching band). The results showed that with synchrotron FTIR microspectroscopy, the images of the molecular chemistry of Pioneer corn could be generated. Such information on the microstructural-chemical features of grain corn can also be used for corn breeding programs for selecting superior varieties of corn for targeted food and feed purposes and for prediction of corn quality and nutritive value for humans and animals.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations74
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural and Food ChemistrySame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207