MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035353803 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2015.11.22

Evaluation and Identification of Genetic Variation Pattern in Cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp] Accessions Using Multivariate Analyses

2015· article· en· W2035353803 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ogbuagu Ugorji Udensi, N. E. Edu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural pest management studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVignaBiologyPoint of deliveryGenetic divergencePrincipal component analysisHorticultureMultivariate statisticsYield (engineering)Genetic variabilityGenetic variationSelection (genetic algorithm)AgronomyBotanyGenetic diversityGenotypeStatisticsMathematicsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thirty accessions of cowpea from Ebonyi, Enugu and Kogi States, Nigeria were used for the study. Seeds of the accessions were randomized in a plot measuring 50x50 meters for three growing seasons. Our results on yield and yield-related traits showed that three principal components were extracted, which contributed 82.23% of the total variability. It revealed that number of seeds pod-1, 100-seed weight, pod length, days to 50% maturity, seed yield, number of leaves plant-1 contributed significantly to the total genetic variability while for proximate composition, four principal components accounted for 93.75% of the total genetic divergence. Cluster analysis revealed that accessions were grouped not necessarily based on geographical location but genetics. Selection for high yielding accessions should be done on cluster 2 as we recommend selection and hybridization of accessions from cluster 1, 2, and 3 for optimal benefit.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicAgricultural pest management studiesFrench-language works237,207