MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030424081 · doi:10.1139/g08-030

Reassessing domestication events in the Near East: Einkorn and <i>Triticum urartu</i>

2008· article· en· W2030424081 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Manfred Heun, Sylvi Haldorsen, K. Vollan

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeology and ancient environmental studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomesticationBiologySensu strictoBotanyZoologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To reassess domestication events in the Near East, accessions of Triticum urartu from a well-described sampling were combined with a representative sample covering the Karacadağ Einkorn wheat domestication. The observed DNA separation between the two wheat species accounts for the main differentiation, but geographic variation within T. urartu is evident and so is the domestication scenario among wild, feral, and domesticated Einkorn. In contrast to the clear DNA differences, it is difficult to separate living T. urartu from wild Einkorn based on morphology. With archaeobotanical material a distinction of carbonized remains of these two wheats is considered to be impossible. We reviewed the differences concerning morphology and maturity and combined these observations with information about archaeological sites in the Near East. In conclusion, the excavation sites in the middle Euphrates may contain T. urartu rather than Einkorn wheat and T. urartu may underlie the reported occurrence of the extinct 2-grained domesticated "Einkorn" wheat. The first Einkorn wheat domestication sensu stricto seems to have happened around the Karacadağ, as reported earlier. The human dimension shown by the excavation of Göbekli Tepe can explain why domesticated phenotypes might have spread quickly.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations44
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207