Transgenic Herbicide Tolerant Canola—The Canadian Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canola is a Canadian development, having been derived through conventional plant breeding of rapeseed ( Brassica napus L. and B. rapa L.). The acceptance of canola in the marketplace has been assisted by the proliferation of new cultivars registered under the mandate of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). New cultivars, whether conventional or transgenic, are evaluated and approved for registration by a national committee known as the Western Canada Canola/Rapeseed Recommending Committee (WCC/RRC). Regulatory approval for transgenics is granted by the CFIA and Health Canada, who oversee the confined and unconfined release of these products into the environment. Transgenic canola cultivars, Roundup Ready {glyphosate [N‐(phosphonomethyl)glycine] tolerant}, and Liberty Link {glufosinate [2‐amino‐4‐(hydroxymethylphosphinyl)butanoic acid] tolerant} were first registered in Canada in 1995, while Navigator [bromoxynil (3,5‐Dibromo‐4‐hydroxybenzonitrile) tolerant] cultivars appeared later. Herbicide tolerant (HT) transgenics have enjoyed increased market share since their development, and now occupy ≈55% of the canola acreage in western Canada. The popularity of these cultivars appears to arise more from agronomic rather than economic advantages. Tolerance tests have failed to show any significant effect of the herbicides on the cultivars.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".