A re-evaluation of controlled freeze-tests and controlled environment hardening conditions to estimate the winter survival potential of hardy winter wheats
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it