Agronomic Performance of Spring Wheat as Related to Planting Date and Photoperiod Response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Photoperiod response impacts the adaptation of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) to specific areas of the world. Both photoperiod sensitive (PS) and photoperiod insensitive (PI) cultivars are grown successfully in the northern regions of the western United States and the Canadian plains. The goal of the present experiment was to determine the relative performance of PI and PS genotypes as related to planting date and to interpret results in view of climate trends for the region. Three sets of near‐isogenic lines that differed for alleles at the Ppd‐D1 locus for photoperiod sensitivity were tested at three planting dates in 15 environments in Montana, Washington, Saskatchewan, and Alberta. Results showed that PS lines headed later than PI lines at all planting dates. Grain yield was significantly greater for PS lines at the first two planting dates although no difference between PS and PI lines occurred for the latest planting date. Our results suggest that PS lines are superior to PI lines for this region. This difference is likely to be significant for regional adaptation as planting date becomes earlier due to increasing spring temperatures.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".