KANE hard red spring wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
KANE is a hard red spring wheat that meets the end-use quality and kernel visual distinguishability specifications of the Canada Western Red Spring market class. KANE was found to be adapted to the wheat-growing regions of Manitoba and eastern Saskatchewan from the data provided by the Central Bread Wheat Cooperative registration test in 2003–2005. In comparison with the check cultivars Katepwa, McKenzie, CDC Teal, AC Barrie, and Superb, the overall grain yield of KANE was similar to the high yield checks McKenzie and Superb. Compared with the highest yielding check McKenzie, KANE was 1.7 d later maturing, was 6 cm shorter, had stronger straw, and was significantly higher (1.1 kg hL-1) in test weight. KANE is resistant to the prevalent races of leaf rust and stem rust. Resistance to common bunt and loose smut was intermediate, being similar to CDC Teal and McKenzie, respectively. Resistance to fusarium head blight was similar to AC Barrie. KANE has good preharvest sprouting resistance with similar or lower sprouting scores compared to the best check in 4 out of 5 yr of testing. End-use quality tests showed that KANE had a 0.7% higher flour extraction rate than the best checks and was within the range of the checks for the other quality traits. Key words: Triticum aestivum L., cultivar description, red spring wheat, test weight, preharvest sprouting, leaf rust
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".