MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086008688 · doi:10.1051/ebr:2007046

Evaluation of crossability between triticale (X<b><i>Triticosecale</i></b>Wittmack) and common wheat, durum wheat and rye

2007· article· en· W2086008688 on OpenAlexafffund
Melissa J. Hills, Linda M. Hall, Doug F. Messenger, R. J. Graf, Brian L. Beres, François Eudes

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Biosafety Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMacEwan UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Food Inspection Agency
KeywordsTriticaleOutcrossingBiologyAgronomyHybridCultivarPollenBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of transgenic triticale as a platform for novel bio-industrial products is predicated on an environmental biosafety assessment that quantifies the potential risks associated with its release. Pollen-mediated gene flow to related species and conventional triticale varieties is one pathway for transgene movement. A tier 1 quantification of triticale hybridization was conducted by emasculating and hand pollinating flowers under greenhouse conditions. Approximately 2000 manual pollinations were conducted for each cross and its reciprocal between two triticale genotypes: a modern triticale cultivar (AC Alta) and primary triticale (89TT108), and common wheat, durum wheat and rye. The frequency of outcrossing, hybrid seed appearance and weight, and F(1) emergence and fertility were recorded. Outcrossing, F(1) emergence and fertility rates were high from crosses between triticale genotypes. Outcrossing in inter-specific crosses was influenced by the species, and the genotype and gender of the triticale parent. In crosses to common and durum wheat where triticale was the male parent, outcrossing was > or =73.0% and > or =69.5%, respectively, but < or =23.9% and < or =3.0% when triticale was the female parent. Overall, outcrossing with rye was lower than with common and durum wheat. F(1) hybrid emergence was greater when triticale was the female parent. With the exception of a single seed, all wheat-triticale F(1) hybrid seeds were non-viable when triticale was the male parent in the cross. Only seven durum wheat-triticale F(1) hybrids emerged from 163 seeds sown, and all were produced with triticale 89TT108 as female parent. With rye, 8 F(1) hybrids emerged from 38 seeds sown, and all were produced from crosses to AC Alta; five with AC Alta as the female parent and three as the male. Interspecific F(1) hybrids were self-sterile, with the exception of those produced in crosses between common wheat and triticale where triticale was the female parent. Tier 2 hybridization quantification will be conducted under field conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 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

Citations35
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Biosafety ResearchSame topicGenetically Modified Organisms ResearchFrench-language works237,207