MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088023027 · doi:10.3198/jpr2009.10.0588crc

Registration of ‘Homestead’ Canada Wildrye

2010· article· en· W2088023027 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. P. Vogel, Robert B. Mitchell, David D. Baltensperger, K. D. Johnson, I. T. Carlson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plant Registrations · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurfgrass Adaptation and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForageTemperate climateBiologyAgronomyEcotypeHardiness (plants)CultivarPerennial plantElymusGrasslandPoaceaeBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

‘Homestead’ (Reg. No. CV‐255, PI 655522) Canada wildrye (Elymus canadensis L.) was developed cooperatively by USDA‐ARS and the University of Nebraska and was released in 2008 for use in the Great Plains and the Midwest USA, a region for which no adapted cultivars were previously available. It was developed by means of the Ecotype Selection Breeding System from a collection made in a remnant prairie in Eastern Nebraska USA. Homestead, which was tested as NE3, is adapted to Plant Adaptation Region (PAR) 251‐5 (Temperate Prairie Parkland–Plant Hardiness Zone 5), which is its origin, and in which it has been evaluated in both space‐transplanted and sward trials. This region is equivalent to USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 5 of the tallgrass‐prairie ecoregion of the Midwest, USA. When grown in its area of adaptation, it produces more forage than the previously available, unadapted cultivar of the species and its forage has higher in vitro dry matter digestibility than another adapted experimental strain to which it was compared in sward forage yield trials. Its primary use will be as a native cool‐season grass component of conservation, roadside, and grassland seeding mixtures.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.971

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.006

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plant RegistrationsSame topicTurfgrass Adaptation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207