MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972155540 · doi:10.4141/p00-068

A re-evaluation of controlled freeze-tests and controlled environment hardening conditions to estimate the winter survival potential of hardy winter wheats

2001· article· en· W1972155540 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lawrence V. Gusta, B. J. O’Connor, Yongping Gao, Sujata Jana

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurfgrass Adaptation and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCultivarWinter wheatFreezing toleranceHorticultureCold hardeningCold toleranceAgronomyGenotypeAnimal scienceBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To identify superior winter-hardy winter wheat genotypes it is essential to have a reliable screening method that can detect small differences in freezing tolerance. A highly significant correlation was obtained between the minimum temperature tolerated by fully cold-hardened seedlings and the field survival index for 36 winter wheat cultivars with freezing tolerance varying from –13°C to –23°C. On the basis of their long-term field survival under cold stress, these cultivars represent two separate genotypic groups, semi-cold-hardy (Group A) and very cold-hardy (Group B). The correlation coefficient between minimum survival temperature and winter survival for the semi-hardy genotypes was not significant, although it was significant for the hardy genotypes (coefficient of determination was 25.9%). However, the minimum survival freeze test did not differentiate genotypes that varied widely in field survival. In comparing the very hardy winter genotypes (e.g., Norstar, Alabaskaja, Roughrider, etc.), no significant correlation was observed between either minimum survival temperature or crown moisture content. The freezing tolerance of 33 winter wheat genotypes was compared for seedlings naturally cold acclimated and for seedlings grown either in soil or hydroponically and hardened in a controlled environment chamber. On average, soil-grown seedlings, cold acclimated in a controlled environment were more freezing tolerant than seedlings acclimated naturally or grown hydroponically and acclimated in a controlled environment. Several semi-winter-hardy genotypes attained a freezing tolerance equivalent to that of very hardy winter genotypes when acclimated in a controlled environment chamber. Thus, it is possible to overestimate the freezing tolerance of seedlings acclimated in a controlled environment. Key words: Winter wheat, freezing tolerance, winter injury, screening techniques

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations39
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicTurfgrass Adaptation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207