Pod shatter resistance evaluation in cultivars and breeding lines of <i>Brassica napus</i>, <i>B. juncea</i> and <i>Sinapis alba</i>
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Pod shatter susceptibility was investigated in Brassica napus germplasm and shatter resistant species of B. juncea and Sinapis alba . The comparisons were made by measuring seed yield in field plots, detached pod rupture energy (RE) and the half‐life of pod‐opening. Pod shatter resistance was significantly greater in B. napus lines derived from interspecific hybridizations of B. napus with B. rapa , B. carinata and B. juncea , than common B. napus cultivars. While these lines exhibited no significant difference in resistance to pod shatter than B. juncea , an entry of S. alba had no yield loss caused by pod shatter. Resistance to pod shatter was characterized in the field as little or no yield loss after full maturity, delayed shattering in time, and stable yield performance under variable climatic conditions during pod maturity. Yield loss caused by pod shatter ranged from a low of 4% for the B. juncea cv. ‘AC Vulcan’ to a high of 61% for the black seeded B. napus line DH12075 in 2‐year field trials after 1 month maturity. Pod shatter resistance was not significantly associated with specific plant and pod morphological traits, except pod length (P = 0.005) in tested materials. Field visual scores of pod shatter through inspections of average pod shatter per plant within plots were highly correlated with plot yield loss. Indoor quantitative evaluations of pod strength using a pendulum machine to measure pod RE and random impact test to measure half‐life of pod‐opening resistance were highly correlated with field yield loss. Multiple evaluations of pod shatter in method and in time after pod maturity are recommended for reliable evaluation of pod shatter resistance.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 it