MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770111823 · doi:10.5539/jas.v9n12p21

Genotype by Trait Associations among Drought Tolerant Maize Inbred Lines

2017· article· en· W2770111823 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cousin Musvosvi, M. C. Wali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetics and Plant Breeding
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad
KeywordsBiplotInbred strainTraitBiologyDrought toleranceAgronomyGrain yieldGene–environment interactionCultivarGenotypeInteractionProductivityBiotechnologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twelve tropical, yellow maize inbred lines identified as drought tolerant were evaluated in multi environments, including managed drought, rain fed and irrigated conditions. The objective was to study genotype-trait associations across environments. A 3 × 4 a-lattice design with two replications was used in each environment. Data were recorded for twenty-one traits. Combined analysis of variance using data from all environments was done for all traits using the GLM procedure in SAS version 9.3. Genotype by trait associations were revealed using the genotype main effect plus genotype-by-environment biplot model in GENSTAT 14th Edition. Inbred lines which were associated with high grain yield and related desirable traits such as a low drought susceptibility index under managed drought were DMR-M-81, DMR-M-88, FA6, GPM36 and M39. Across the diverse environments, DMR-M-84, DMR-M-88, FA6 and GPM36 were associated with grain yield and/or its related traits. The inbred lines associated with desirable traits could be evaluated for combining ability in order to know their desirability in cultivar development. These inbred lines could be used as female parents in seed production programmes since high productivity and drought tolerance are important qualities of female parents in seed production.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.200 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicGenetics and Plant BreedingFrench-language works237,207