Simulated Genetically Modified Triticale: Adventitious Presence from Volunteers in Four Cropping Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Harvesting volunteer genetically modified (GM) crops is a likely source of adventitious presence (AP) that could preclude coexistence with conventional crops. Spring triticale (× Triticosecale Wittm. ex A. Camus) is proposed as a biofuel and, with genetic modifications, as a platform crop for bioindustrial products. We investigated seed production of simulated volunteer triticale in four western Canadian cropping systems: glyphosate‐resistant (GR) canola ( Brassica napus L.); glufosinate‐resistant (GLUR) canola; field pea ( Pisum sativum L.); and imidazolinone‐resistant (IR) wheat, in 2006 and 2007 at two locations, and quantified crop yield losses, triticale seed viability, and AP of triticale in harvested crops. Fecundity of volunteers in the absence of herbicides varied between locations, from 3506 to 9280 seeds m –2 , and with crop: GLUR canola = GR canola < IR spring wheat < field pea. Herbicides applied preseeding (PRE) reduced triticale densities between 30 and 80%, and survivors produced between 178 and 2052 seeds m –2 . Herbicides applied in‐crop (POST) were more effective and reduced triticale densities between 8 and > 99% and fecundity between <1 and 1231 seeds m –2 . The combination of PRE and POST applications reduced fecundity below that of PRE or POST alone in 3 of 16 crop years. The AP was >1% of the crop (weight/weight) in 3 of 13 crop years when both PRE and POST herbicides were applied. Volunteer triticale is a probable source of AP in subsequent crops that may reduce acceptability in some GM sensitive markets.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".