MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perennial Grain and Oilseed Crops

2016· review· en· W2114336994 on OpenAlexaff
Michael B. Kantar, Catrin Tyl, Kevin Dorn, Xiaofei Zhang, Jacob M. Jungers, Joe M. Kaser, Rachel R. Schendel, James O. Eckberg, Bryan C. Runck, Mirko Bunzel, Nick R. Jordan, Robert M. Stupar, M. David Marks, James A. Anderson, Gregg A. Johnson, Craig C. Sheaffer, Tonya C. Schoenfuss, Baraem Ismail, George E. Heimpel, Donald L. Wyse

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Plant Biology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerennial plantBioproductsEnvironmental scienceCroppingTillageAgricultureMiscanthusAgronomyAgroforestryGreenhouse gasAgroecosystemEcosystem servicesEcosystemBioenergyBiologyBiofuelEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, agroecosystems have been designed to produce food. Modern societies now demand more from food systems-not only food, fuel, and fiber, but also a variety of ecosystem services. And although today's farming practices are producing unprecedented yields, they are also contributing to ecosystem problems such as soil erosion, greenhouse gas emissions, and water pollution. This review highlights the potential benefits of perennial grains and oilseeds and discusses recent progress in their development. Because of perennials' extended growing season and deep root systems, they may require less fertilizer, help prevent runoff, and be more drought tolerant than annuals. Their production is expected to reduce tillage, which could positively affect biodiversity. End-use possibilities involve food, feed, fuel, and nonfood bioproducts. Fostering multidisciplinary collaborations will be essential for the successful integration of perennials into commercial cropping and food-processing systems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations85
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Plant BiologySame topicBioenergy crop production and managementFrench-language works237,207