MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766342641 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2017-0102

Spring phenological adaptation of blue honeysuckle (<i>Lonicera caerulea</i> L.) foundation germplasm in a temperate climate

2017· article· en· W2766342641 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Eric M. Gerbrandt, Robert H. Bors, Ravindra N. Chibbar, T. E. Baumann

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermplasmHoneysucklePhenologyTemperate climateBiologyAdaptation (eye)GeographyEcologyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blue honeysuckle (Lonicera caerulea L.) is a novel fruit crop that stands out for its northern climatic adaptation. Understanding spring phenological adaptation to temperate climate is central to development of a broader range of production and greater mainstream crop potential. In 2012 and 2013 across three sites in the Fraser Valley, British Columbia, spring phenophases from bud break to fruit harvest were determined across three foundation groups. Genetic variability is characterized for Russian, Japanese, and Kuril blue honeysuckle foundation groups used in breeding at the University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK. Germplasm group membership is the principal feature of phenological adaptation. Although temperate climate adaptation is limited in the Russian germplasm, the intermediate Japanese and later Kuril spring phenology provide an adequate degree of temperate climate adaptation to facilitate commercial production. These findings demonstrate that blue honeysuckle has phenological adaptation to a temperate climate. Diversity between and within genetic groups presents opportunities for crop enhancement, especially through breeding for later bloom periods.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicPlant Physiology and Cultivation StudiesFrench-language works237,207