MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068881273 · doi:10.4141/cjps09154

Natural enrichment of selenium in Saskatchewan field peas (<i>Pisum sativum</i> L.).

2010· article· en· W2068881273 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Dil Thavarajah, Thomas D. Warkentin, Albert Vandenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicSelenium in Biological Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionMinistry of Agriculture - SaskatchewanU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsSativumPisumField peaSeleniumBiofortificationCultivarCropBiologyAgronomyHorticultureAnimal scienceChemistryMicronutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pulses are important dietary sources of selenium (Se). Supplying needed Se through widely used foods such as pulses and cereals could increase dietary Se intake. We analyzed the total Se concentration of 17 field pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivars grown at six locations for 2 yr in Saskatchewan. A significant effect of location was identified, with the highest Se concentration in pea seeds grown in the Saskatoon region and the lowest concentration in the Melfort region. The effect of crop year was not significant. Significant genotypic differences in total Se concentration among the 17 field pea cultivars were not observed in the combined analysis. Total Se concentrations over six locations × 2 yr ranged from 373 to 519 µg kg-1, corresponding to 68-94% of the recommended daily allowance (RDA) for adults based on a 100 g serving of dry field peas. Saskatchewan soils are derived from marine shale and are rich in Se, and pulses grown in Saskatchewan have the potential to provide an excellent natural source of this element. Key words: Selenium, field pea, biofortification

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations27
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicSelenium in Biological SystemsFrench-language works237,207