Genetic Progress from 40 Years of Orchardgrass Breeding in North America Measured under Hay Management
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
There has been considerable activity in breeding orchardgrass ( Dactylis glomerata L.) cultivars in North America during the latter half of the 20th century, but little effort devoted to quantification of breeding progress. The objectives of this study were to quantify changes in mean cultivar performance for that time compared with the progress achieved from one cycle of half‐sib progeny selection within the USDA population of orchardgrass accessions. Forty‐two cultivars (32 North American cultivars and 10 European cultivars) were tested at three locations (Arlington, WI and Rock Springs, PA, and Ottawa, Ontario, Canada) in 1995 through 1997. Cultivars were grouped into three experiments by maturity class: early, medium, and late. North American cultivars averaged 3, 9, and 12% higher in forage yield than European cultivars for early, medium, and late maturity groups, respectively. Between 1955 and 1997, forage yield and ground cover of early‐maturity cultivars increased by 2.5 Mg ha −1 decade −1 and 4.0% decade −1 , respectively. Forage nutritional value of medium‐maturity cultivars increased during that time, although this was probably not due to direct selection. Significant gains were made in forage yield and Drechslera spp. leafspot reaction of cultivars derived from two individual breeding programs, although the majority of orchardgrass cultivars lack improvements in forage traits.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it