Evaluation of Flax Genotypes for Cold Tolerance and Yield in South‐East Texas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Flax is an established crop in many parts of the world due to its positive health effects and numerous industrial uses. Due to increasing interest in biofuels, flax has been evaluated throughout the U.S.A. as a potential biodiesel crop. The main purpose of this research was to evaluate current and historical genotypes of flax in different regions of south‐east Texas. Twenty genotypes of flax were evaluated under dryland conditions for their agronomic and yield potential in College Station and McGregor, TX starting in 2008 thru 2011. The results suggest that all genotypes developed in Texas showed acceptable cold tolerance compared with genotypes developed in other locations. There were significant genotype–environment interactions (P < 0.001). A cross between Caldwell/Dillman (Texas genotype) was highly adapted to the environments of south‐east Texas. Nekoma and York (genotypes developed in North Dakota) yielded well in non‐cold years (>28 ° F) at College Station. Utilization of cold tolerance trait identified in Texas genotypes coupled with high yield potential of modern genotypes would have a significant impact on yield improvement of flax in south‐east Texas. Overall, flax is well adapted to growth in the area surrounding College Station, TX and has potential as an oilseed crop for production in south‐east Texas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".