MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990409904 · doi:10.2134/agronj2009.0137

Crop Genotype and Plant Population Density Impact Flowering Phenology and Synchrony between Cropped and Volunteer Spring Wheat

2009· article· en· W1990409904 on OpenAlexafffund
Christian J. Willenborg, Ed C. Luschei, Anita L. Brûlé‐Babel, Rene C. Van Acker

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaAgriculture Food and Rural DevelopmentUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologySowingPhenologyCropAgronomyPopulationVolunteer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) is one of many crops into which novel traits have been incorporated using recombinant DNA technology, and thus may require segregation from nontransgenic wheat. Volunteer wheat populations, which cannot be selectively removed from wheat crops, pose a challenge to segregation because they may serve to facilitate trait movement. However, diverse flowering phenologies among wheat genotypes planted at various densities may result in flowering asynchrony, thus minimizing pollen‐mediated gene flow (PMGF). We tested this theory with a comparative analysis that examined the influence of crop plant population density, genotype, and height on flowering phenology and synchrony between volunteer and cropped wheat populations. We found that time from crop sowing to first flower, peak flowering, and flowering cessation varied significantly among genotypes. Increasing crop plant population density resulted in accelerated crop flowering for all genotypes, but had little effect on flowering synchrony. Although not always significant, the time interval from sowing to 5, 50, and 95% flowering, as well as the flowering duration of the volunteer population, were also greater at low crop plant population densities. Synchronicity of flowering varied among genotypes, with tall genotypes consistently exhibiting more flowering synchrony with volunteer wheat than short genotypes. However, the response of flowering synchrony to height may have been a product of the genotypes tested and further study to confirm these results is needed. The results of this study suggest that, despite a short flowering period, there is considerable potential for flowering synchrony between cropped and volunteer wheat populations. Nevertheless, opportunity exists to reduce flowering synchrony between cropped and volunteer wheat populations by utilizing genotypic variation for flowering phenology to minimize flowering overlap, provided that an adequate crop plant population density is attained.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy JournalSame topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsFrench-language works237,207