Characterization of Northern Spring Flax as a Winter Crop for Southeast Texas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing interest in biodiesel production led to flax being evaluated as a potential biodiesel crop throughout the USA. The objectives of this study were 1) to determine if northern spring flax varieties can be grown as a winter crop in the southeast Texas environment, 2) characterize the varieties under the southeast Texas environment and 3) to determine if northern spring flax varieties can be grown on a laser-leveled field with 17.8 cm row spacing rather than raised beds. In this study, five northern spring flax varieties, Nekoma, Omega, Pembina, Prairie Thunder and York were grown as a winter crop in Beaumont, Texas on a laser-leveled field. The flax varieties were characterized with respect to morphology, phenology and physiology. In the present study, Omega and Pembina were taller compared to the other varieties. Nekoma had more branches, whereas Omega had more immature capsules per plant, compared to other varieties. Leaf photosynthetic rate was higher in Omega and Prairie Thunder, compared to other varieties. At harvest, Omega and York had more mature capsules, and greater capsule weight and shoot weight per plant, compared to other varieties. Due to delayed machine harvest, there was decrease in flax seed yield due to capsule dehiscence and shattering. Omega had more capsule dehiscence and shattering, compared to other varieties. Seeds of Nekoma and Pembina had more oil content and Omega and Pembina had more protein content. All the above flax varieties have potential to be used as an oilseed crop for biodiesel production in southeast Texas.
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".