MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of European Fibre Flax (<i>Linum usitatissimum</i>) Cultivars under Eastern Canadian Growing Conditions

2002· article· en· W2106238615 on OpenAlexaffabout
S. J. Couture, W. L. Asbil, Antonio DiTommaso, A. K. Watson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agronomy and Crop Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinumCultivarBiologyAgronomyBiomass (ecology)Dry weightHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Renewed interest in natural fibres, decreasing subsidies to European producers, and high production costs have led the move to reintroduce fibre flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) production into eastern Canada. Research was conducted at the Macdonald Campus of McGill University, Québec, Canada in 1998 and 1999 and at Winchester and Kemptville, Ontario, Canada in 1998, to assess the performance of seven European fibre flax cultivars. Parameters evaluated included plant density, branching ratio, stem diameter, fresh and dry biomass, and mean harvest height. Data from all sites and years were subjected to a pooled anova where appropriate. The cultivar main effect was detected for all parameters measured, with the exception of mean fresh weight and mean height at harvest. There was also a site main effect for all parameters except for branching ratio. A cultivar–site interaction was found for all parameters except for mean stem diameter and mean dry weight. Results indicate a strong potential for producing fibre flax in eastern Canada using currently available European 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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agronomy and Crop ScienceSame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207