Screening for lodging resistance in spring wheat breeding programmes
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
Abstract Selection for lodging resistance in Canadian hard red spring wheat under natural conditions is difficult due to the sporadic and often random nature of lodging events. We conducted field trials in Edmonton AB Canada (2000–2002) to determine if either a high seeding rate, or artificially inducing lodging (by dragging a weighted apparatus across plots at the early milk stage), would be an effective screen for determining genetic lodging resistance in wheat breeding programmes. For the 25 genotypes tested, applying artificial lodging at the experimental mean early milk stage was a suitable method to screen and identify lodging tolerant and susceptible genotypes. Tolerance to artificially induced lodging was mainly found within semi‐dwarf genotypes, and susceptibility was mainly found within Canadian bread wheat genotypes. Severe lodging resulted in yield losses as high as 40%. Lodging tolerant genotypes identified in this study are now being crossed into elite western Canadian bread wheat in an effort to increase genetic lodging resistance within Canadian breeding lines.
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