MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2380228523

Research of Dry Matter Accumulation in Micro-endosperm Super-high Oil Corn and Gaoyou 115 Corn

2008· article· en· W2380228523 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zikai Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueSeed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCrop Yield and Soil Fertility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndospermEmbryoDry weightDry matterAgronomyZea maysKernel (algebra)Corn oilChemistryBiologyHorticultureBotanyFood scienceMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Change rule of the dry weight of corn embryo,OSK(the other section of a kernel except embryo)and the whole kernel in the developing grains of micro-endosperm super-high oil corn and Gaoyou 115 corn were studied in this article.The results showed that the embryo dry weight of both of micro-endosperm corn and Gaoyou115 corn were basically kept linear growth,and the former was slightly smaller than the latter。The peak OSK dry weight of micro-endosperm corn and Gaoyou115 corn were respectively in 28 DAP(days after pollination)and 42 DAP,and the former was about 29.94%-43.32% of the latter.The whole kernel peak dry weight of micro-endosperm corn and Gaoyou115 corn were respectively in 35 DAP and 49 DAP.The former single kernel output is the 26%-42% of the latter.Why micro-endosperm corn had low grain yield is mainly due to OSK filling Stage shortened 2 to 3 weeks than Gaoyou 115 corn.The micro-endosperm corn had a quicker growth than Gaoyou115 corn in embryo weight ratio,so the former embryo weight ratio was the latter's 2.13-2.73 times at harvest time.It can reach to 41.16%-52.60%.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeedSame topicCrop Yield and Soil FertilityFrench-language works237,207