Short Communication: Comparative effect of lodging on seed yield of flax and wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vera, C. L., Duguid, S. D., Fox, S. L., Rashid, K. Y., Dribnenki, J. C. P. and Clarke, F. R. 2012. Short Communication: Comparative effect of lodging on seed yield of flax and wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 92: 39–43. Lodging may limit crop productivity and hinder the normal process of harvesting crops. Results from 16 yr (1994–2009) of the Flax Co-operative test and from 29 yr (1981–2009) of the Central Bread Wheat Co-operative test, conducted annually for the evaluation of advanced breeding lines at various locations in the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, Canada, were used to determine the effect of lodging on the seed yield of these two crop species. Seed yield data were regressed on corresponding lodging scores (1–9 scale) collected from field evaluations. Lodging was more frequently a problem in flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) than in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), with average seed yield reductions of 32% and 16%, respectively, when lodging was most severe. Disease has been observed in association with the occurrence of lodging in flax. Further research is necessary to elucidate the participation of airborne and soil microorganisms, particularly pasmo, caused by Septoria linicola (Speg.) Garassini, in the mode and degree to which flax is subjected to, and affected by, lodging.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".