MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016306621 · doi:10.1139/g07-037

Landmark research in legumes

2007· review· en· W2016306621 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ranjit Singh, Gyuhwa Chung, Randall L. Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMedicago truncatulaFabaceaeLegumeMultipurpose treeLotusAgronomyForageNutraceuticalAgroforestrySymbiosisBotanyWoody plantBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Legumes are members of the family Fabaceae or Leguminosae and include economically important grain legumes, oilseed crops, forage crops, shrubs, and tropical or subtropical trees. Legumes are a rich source of quality protein for humans and animals. They also enrich the soil by producing their own nitrogen in symbiosis with nitrogen-fixing bacteria. International centers and national institutes collect, maintain, distribute, and produce high-yielding legumes (grain-pulses, oilseeds, forages, nutraceuticals, medicinal shrubs, and trees). Legume breeders are confined within the primary gene pools (GP-1) in their varietal improvement programs and have not exploited secondary gene pools (GP-2), tertiary gene pools (GP-3), or quaternary gene pools (GP-4). Legumes are also an excellent source of timber, medicine, nutraceuticals, tannins, gums, insecticides, resins, varnish, paints, dyes, and eco-friendly by-products such as soy diesel. Three forage crops, Medicago truncatula, Lotus japonicus, and Trifolium pratense, are model legumes for phylogenetic studies and genome sequencing. This paper concludes that a "protein revolution" is needed to meet the protein demands of the world.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.008

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.

Opus teacher head0.194
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations126
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisFrench-language works237,207