Concentration of cadmium and other elements in the grain of near-isogenic durum lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L. var durum) shows genetic variation for concentration of the heavy metal cadmium in the grain. This variation is being exploited to develop cultivars with low cadmium concentration, but there is no information on the effect of incorporation of the trait on uptake of other elements or on economic traits such as yield. Five pairs of near-isogenic high/low cadmium durum wheat lines and their parents were grown in a randomized complete block trial with three replications. Trials were grown at Swift Current, Saskatchewan in 1994, at Swift Current, Stewart Valley and Regina, Saskatchewan in 1995 and 1996, at Langdon and Fargo, North Dakota in 1995, and at Casselton and Langdon, North Dakota in 1996. Grain yield, test weight, kernel weight and protein concentration were determined. Grain cadmium, calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, nickel and zinc were measured by atomic absorption or inductively coupled plasma emission spectroscopy. The low cadmium trait had no significant effect on average yield, grain protein concentration, test weight, or kernel weight as indicated by comparison of the high and low cadmium isolines. Average grain cadmium concentration differed among years within locations, among locations within years, and among genotypes. The average grain cadmium concentration of the high cadmium isolines was approximately double that of the low cadmium isolines. There were significant genotypic differences in grain concentration of the other elements, but the differences were not associated with the high and low cadmium isogenic lines. The low cadmium allele seems to be specific for cadmium, lowering cadmium without altering concentrations of other elements or affecting economic traits. Key words: Triticum turgidum L. var durum; grain cadmium concentration; grain yield
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".