AC Splendor hard red spring wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AC Splendor is a hard red spring wheat that meets the end-use quality and kernel visual distinguishability specifications of the Canada Western Red Spring class. AC Splendor was evaluated in the Central Bread Wheat Cooperative Registration Test in 1993, 1994 and 1995 and was found to be adapted to the wheat-growing regions of the Canadian prairies. In comparison to the check cultivars Neepawa, Katepwa, Columbus, Roblin and AC Majestic, AC Splendor grain yield was similar to Katepwa, Columbus and Roblin; however, AC Splendor exhibited earlier maturity by 2.8, 7.5 and 1.6 d, respectively. AC Splendor is resistant to Puccinia graminis Pers.:Pers. f. sp. tritici Eriks. E. Henn. that causes the disease stem rust and P. triticina Eriks. that causes leaf rust and has intermediate resistance to Tilletia tritici (Bjerk.) R. Wolff and T. laevis Kuhn in Rabenh. that causes common bunt. Resistance to Fusarium graminearum Schwabe [teleomorph Gibberella zeae (Schwein.) Petch] that causes fusarium head blight is poor. End-use quality tests identified that AC Splendor had high protein concentration and was in the range of the checks for the other quality traits. Key words: Triticum aestivum L., cultivar description, red spring wheat, early maturity
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".