MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051932095 · doi:10.2134/agronj2003.2000

Crop Modeling and the Identification of Stable Coefficients that May Reflect Significant Groups of Genes

2003· article· en· W2051932095 on OpenAlexaff
L. A. Hunt, Matthew Reynolds, K. D. Sayre, S. Rajaram, Jeffrey W. White, Weikai Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCrop Yield and Soil Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCropIdentification (biology)BiologyCrop simulation modelBiotechnologyGenomicsField (mathematics)AgronomyGeneGeneticsMathematicsBotanyGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge about the functioning of a crop system can be embedded in simulation models of crop growth and development. Such quantitative models have until now made extensive use of physiological knowledge, but modeling could benefit greatly by incorporating genetic information. Equally, because models can help resolve environmentally varying characteristics into stable characteristics that reflect groups of genes, genomics research could benefit from modeling efforts. The use of the model Cropsim to analyze wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) growth and development is demonstrated. Data on reproductive development were well fitted when the life cycle was divided into phases, although photoperiodic sensitivity varied between phases. Describing leaf appearance satisfactorily required introducing an effect of photoperiod. Understanding the need for a breakdown into phases of development, for varying photoperiodic sensitivities, and for photoperiodic control of leaf appearance, could be enhanced by genomic studies. Simulating growth of wheat over successive seasons required changing supposedly stable genotypic characteristics. Furthermore, growth of near inbred lines incorporating the Lr19 chromosome translocation varied with genotypic background. These results also indicate that, given the variation in modeling outputs from year to year, care should be taken in the application of models to long‐term problems, and that efforts should be devoted to model improvement. Further development of crop models will benefit from associating genomic analysis with field experiments and model analyses. Much could be gained from increased interaction among model developers, field experimenters, and genomics researchers.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations25
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy JournalSame topicCrop Yield and Soil FertilityFrench-language works237,207