ECOLOGICAL PLASTICITY OF SPRING OATS IN THE CONDITIONS OF WESTERN SIBERIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The works presents the results of studying 165 specimen of spring oats from the world collection The N.I. Vavilov All-Russian Research Institute of Plant Genetic Resources. The research was conducted in the northern forest-steppe zone of Western Siberia in 2014-2016. The soil on which the research was done can be characterized as leached chernozem, heavy loam by texture and particle size distribution, of medium capacity. The content of humus equals 7.8%, reaction of soil solution is close to neutral, рН is 6.0. In the horizon of 0-40 cm the content of N-NO3 is 35.4mg/kg, P2O5 – 122 mg/kg, K2O – 98 mg/kg. An assessment is given to spring oat specimen by the parameters of ecological plasticity bi and yield stability Si2 . The research was conducted in the conditions characterized in accordance with the index of environmental conditions Ij. The most favourable conditions developed in 2016, when the environment index Ij equaled 109.2. Adverse conditions were identifi ed in 2014, when Ij equaled -46.25, and in 2015, when Ij equaled -62.99. By the results of the dispersion analysis the dominating infl uence of environmental conditions on the yield of spring oat specimen is established at 85.3%, the share of genotype infl uence is 2.6%. Eight specimen of spring oats proved to exceed Creole standard variety by yield with the trait variability being from 29.3% to 87.1%. Sources for creation of intensive type varieties, with high responsiveness to favorable conditions for growth and development are identifi ed: IL 86-1158 (to 14316, the USA), Jumbo (to 14702, Germany), Hamilton (to 14761, the USA), Talisman (to 14785, Russia), Omikho (to 14827, Russia), OA 269 (to 14992, Canada), Stayer (to 15181, Russia), Eclipse (to 15187, Russia). High-yielding genotypes which react to environmental conditions to a medium degree (bi is nearing a unit), and have high yield stability (Si2 is nearing zero) are defi ned, namely Express (to 14505, Russia), bi = 1.04, Si2 = 0.053, Yubilyar (to 14723, Belarus), bi = 0.92, Si2 = 0.070, C.I. 7321 (to 14737, the USA), bi = 1.09, Si2 = 0.076, Vallntin (to 15189, Slovakia), bi = 1.13, Si2 = 0.050, CDC Bell (to 14805, Canada), bi = 0.62, Si2 = 0.0065.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".