Stability of Nonflowering Orchardgrass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.) is a valuable pasture species in much of temperate humid North America. However, profuse and early flowering in spring creates management problems for graziers and reduces intake of livestock in a management‐intensive rotational grazing system. The objectives of this study were to estimate environmental stability, genotypic variability, and frequency of nonflowering and sparse‐flowering plants in two sparse‐flowering orchardgrass populations. Seven cultivars and 299 half‐sib families were evaluated for 2 yr at five locations between 42° and 47°N latitude. Sparse‐flowering populations WO‐SF‐B and WO‐SF‐C were later in maturity, produced fewer panicles per plant, and had higher frequencies of sparse‐flowering and nonflowering plants than the cultivars. Plants had varying levels of expression of the nonflowering trait, ranging from slightly sensitive (sparse flowering in one year) to highly sensitive (stable nonflowering across years), with highly sensitive plants found only within populations WO‐SF‐B and WO‐SF‐C. The nonflowering trait of orchardgrass appears to be controlled by floral‐regulation genes that are turned off by short‐day temperatures below a critical threshold. Such a threshold appears to exist for all orchardgrass plants, but is increased in those plants expressing the nonflowering trait.
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".