Interpretation of Genotype × Environment Interaction for Winter Wheat Yield in Ontario
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
An understanding of the causes of genotype × environment (GE) interaction can help identify traits that contribute to better cultivar performance and environments that facilitate cultivar evaluation. Through subjecting environment‐centered yield of a multi‐environment trial data to singular value decomposition, the portion of yield variation that is relevant to cultivar evaluation is partitioned into noncrossover and crossover GE interaction, quantified by the first two principal components (PC), respectively. Each PC is a set of genotypic scores multiplied by a set of environmental scores. By relating the PC scores to genotypic and environmental covariates, GE interaction represented by each PC can be interpreted in terms of trait × factor interactions. This strategy was employed in analysis of the 1992 to 1998 Ontario winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) performance trial data. Results indicated that plant height and maturity were the major genotypic causes of GE interaction, whereas cold temperature in the winter and hot temperature in the summer were the major environmental causes of GE interaction. Positive interactions were found between earlier maturity vs. warmer winters or hotter summers, and between shorter plant height vs. warmer winters or cooler summers. In addition, better resistance to septoria leaf blotch (caused by Septoria secalis Prill. & Delacr.) was frequently associated with overall performance. The results of this study should help in determining breeding objectives and for selecting test sites or environments for winter wheat breeding in Ontario.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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