MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607451052 · doi:10.2527/af.2017.0112

The future of genetically engineered plants to stabilize yield and improve feed

2017· article· en· W2607451052 on OpenAlexaff
Gaganpreet Kaur Dhariwal, André Laroche

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Frontiers · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiotechnologyBiomass (ecology)Raw materialYield (engineering)BiofuelGenetically modified organismBiochemical engineeringAbiotic stressCropBioenergyGenetically modified cropsGenetically engineeredBiologyAgronomyEngineeringMaterials scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent biotechnological developments that tackle different crop improvement challenges, including both decreased yield and feed quality with ever increasing impact of different biotic and abiotic stresses, are readily becoming available to imprint lasting positive economic impacts on the cost of crop production and feeding animals. The challenge in improving digestibility of feed for the benefits of improving growth per unit of fed biomass, which is also shared by the bioethanol industry using lingo-cellulose as feedstock, can be achieved through diversifying feed source. In this article, where the available biotechnological options and possibilities for use of the genetically engineered plants to stabilize yield and improved feed quality have been reviewed, emphasis has been given on accelerating the use of genome editing tools.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal FrontiersSame topicPlant tissue culture and regenerationFrench-language works237,207