Optimization of cotton variety registration criteria aided with a genotype-by-trait biplot analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
China is one of the largest cotton producing countries in the world thanks to high yields, on which a variety registration system has mainly focused, so that a lack of quality is nowadays acknowledged as a weak point of the cotton industry in that country. The objective of this study was to check the hypothesis that bias in cultivar selection in favor of yield has been maintained through the application of an imperfect selection index (SI), but that a better outcome is possible. Our demonstration is based on an analysis of the data from ten years of cotton variety trials using genotype-by-trait biplots, implemented both for the cultivar selection index (SI) currently applied in China and for an adjusted selection index (ASI) that more effectively took into account the antagonism between yield and quality traits. The main findings were: 1) significant negative associations between yield and fiber quality hindered their simultaneous improvement; 2) registered genotypes were mainly determined by the SI which was primarily yield-oriented; 3) no progress in fiber quality was recorded unlike yield; 4) balanced progress in yield and quality is possible through an adjusted selection index (ASI) guided by genotype-by-trait biplot analysis.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it