MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182536087 · doi:10.4141/cjps2010-021

Identification of early-maturing maize inbred lines based on multiple traits under drought and low N environments for hybrid development and population improvement

2011· article· en· W2182536087 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Baffour Badu‐Apraku, R.O. Akinwale

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetics and Plant Breeding
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermplasmIntrogressionHybridDrought toleranceBiologyAgronomyDrought stressInbred strainPopulationZea maysProductivityGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Badu-Apraku, B. and Akinwale, R. O. 2011. Identification of early-maturing maize inbred lines based on multiple traits under drought and low N environments for hybrid development and population improvement. Can. J. Plant Sci. 91: 931–942. Drought and low nitrogen stresses are major limiting factors to maize (Zea mays L.) production and productivity in West and Central Africa. Studies were conducted from 2007 to 2009 at three locations in Nigeria under induced drought stress and low nitrogen conditions. The objective was to identify superior inbred lines for use as parents for hybrid production and for introgression into maize breeding populations. The inbreds TZEI 17, TZEI 13, TZEI 23, TZEI 2, TZEI 3, TZEI 22, TZEI 7, TZEI 11, and TZEI 8 were identified as the most promising parents under drought stress. Under low N, TZEI 7, TZEI 11, TZEI 2, TZEI 4, TZEI 10, TZEI 8, and TZEI 22 were selected. TZEI 11, TZEI 2, TZEI 8, and TZEI 22 had combined tolerance to drought stress and low N and could be used as germplasm sources for introgression of tolerance genes as well as for the development of drought and/or low-N-tolerant hybrids. Under drought stress, TZEI 17, TZEI 3, TZEI 23, and TZEI 13 were the closest to the ideal genotype, while TZEI 7, TZEI 2, and TZEI 11 were the closest under low-N conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicGenetics and Plant BreedingFrench-language works237,207