MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079644952 · doi:10.4141/p01-118

Morphological characteristics of crested wheatgrass populations of diverse origin

2002· article· en· W2079644952 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
A. Mellish, Bruce Coulman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurfgrass Adaptation and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgropyron cristatumTiller (botany)BiologyCrown (dentistry)PloidyHybridAgronomyBotanyAgropyronGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In crested wheatgrass, the species Agropyron cristatum includes populations that are diploid and tetraploid, either naturally or artificially induced. The species Agropyron desertorum is tetraploid and there are culitvars that are hybrids between A. cristatum and A. desertorum. The goal of this study was to compare the morphology (height, crown width, tiller density, tiller weight and tiller angle) of populations from the two species and hybrids, including S9240, a recently developed colchicine induced tetraploid A. cristatum. Data were collected in 1999 and 2000 from several different sward-seeded and spaced-planted trials. The four tetraploid crested wheatgrasses (A. cristatum “Kirk” and “S9240”, A. desertorum “Nordan”, and A. desertorum × A. cristatum “CD-II”) were significantly (P < 0.05) taller, narrower in row width, and produced fewer, heavier tillers than the diploid A. cristatum “Parkway”. Among the tetraploid populations, S9240 was significantly (P < 0.05) taller and produced fewer tillers. S9240 also produced significantly (P < 0.05) heavier tillers than CD-II and Nordan, and also than Kirk, one year of two. Row widths were variable among populations, but S9240 generally produced a narrower crown than other populations. Key words: Crested wheatgrass, polyploidy, plant height, crown diameter, tiller characteristics

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicTurfgrass Adaptation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207