AC Pennant, AC Base and Andante yellow condiment mustard cultivars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Yellow condiment mustard (Sinapis alba L.) occupies about 50% of the total acreage of condiment mustard grown in western Canada. Breeding efforts at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in Saskatoon (AAFC) from 1987 to 2001 resulted in the registration of three new cultivars. AC Pennant, AC Base and Andante had 8, 7 and 6% higher grain yield, respectively, than the check cultivar Ochre, on average over 28 location years in 3 yr of condiment mustard Co-op tests 1999–2001. All three cultivars had similar maturity and plant height to Ochre. Andante had lower fixed oil than Ochre while AC Base had lower protein content. Andante had much greater seed weight than Ochre. AC Pennant had greater seed mucilage content than Ochre, while the seed mucilage content of Andante was highly significantly improved over Ochre (by about 50%). The seed colour of AC Base and Andante was a darker yellow than that of Ochre (a high negative number indicates a brighter yellow colour). Seed glucosinolate and chlorophyll content of AC Pennant, AC Base and Andante were not different from Ochre. Since its registration in 2002, Andante has become the predominant condiment yellow mustard cultivar in western Canada because of its increased grain yield and superior seed quality. AC Pennant has been the official check cultivar since 2002. All three cultivars are well adapted to the mustard growing areas of the Canadian prairies. Key words: Sinapis alba L., cultivar descriptions, grain yield, seed quality
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".