MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088104812 · doi:10.2135/cropsci2004.0137

An Empirical Model for Pollen‐Mediated Gene Flow in Wheat

2005· article· en· W2088104812 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrop Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanMonsanto (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLogarithmBiologyFunction (biology)Empirical modellingField (mathematics)PollinationBiological systemPollenRegressionRegression analysisStatisticsMathematicsEcologyComputer scienceGeneticsMathematical analysisPure mathematicsSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The extent of pollen‐mediated gene flow (PMGF) in wheat ( Triticum spp. L.) as a function of distance from a pollinator source has been measured in recent field studies. Wheat is primarily self‐pollinated; however, some cross‐pollination can occur depending on biological, agronomic, and environmental factors. The complexity of these interactions restricts attempts to develop a workable mechanistic model; therefore, we pursued an entirely empirical modeling approach. We fit a simple empirical regression model to all available observed data and then used it to make general predictions about the effects of field size, blending at harvest, and isolation distances on PMGF in wheat. The empirical model was derived by fitting a least squares regression line to the gene flow data when plotted as the logarithm of PMGF versus the square root distance from the edge of the source field. Linear behavior was observed when either the maximum or mean PMGF was plotted in this manner. A “General Wheat Model” (GWM) of this same mathematical form is given which provides a conservative (“high‐end”) prediction of PMGF in the general case: , where PMGF is the percent gene flow at a particular point in the field (without blending), and x is the distance (m) from the edge of the source field. The GWM was used to show that the effect of source field size is minimal for sources of 10 ha or larger, where asymptotic levels of PMGF are obtained. The model was also applied to show that harvest‐blending produces PMGF at the field level 10 to 50 times lower than the highest level observed at the edge of the receptor field. Significantly, isolation buffers of 0 to 10 m were predicted by the GWM to have only a minimal impact on harvest‐blended PMGF, when the receptor field had an overall width of 100 m or greater. Without any isolation buffers, the harvest‐blended PMGF between neighboring commercial‐sized (>10 ha) fields was less than 0.1% (well below commercial thresholds for foreign material in wheat seed and grain). This is also well below any existing standards for labeling the presence of approved biotech traits in food or seed distributed or sold as conventional.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.261 · 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