Adaptability and Phenotypic Stability of the Sugarcane RB Genotype by the AMMI Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this work is to evaluate the adaptability and phenotypic stability of the RB sugarcane genotype using the AMMI method. The experiments were performed in five production units in the state of Pernambuco, in cultivars of sugarcane soca and ressoca, using 14 RB sugarcane genotypes—11 RB clones of series 2004 and three cultivars as controls. Each combination of production unit × cutting was considered as environment, for a total of 13 environments. The experimental design was with random blocks, and four repetitions. We estimated the parameters tons of sugarcane per hectare (TCH) and tons of pol per hectare (TPH). The genotype G12 displayed general adaptability, phenotypic stability and high productivity for the two parameters. The genotypes G10, G13 and G14 had the highest yield, largest contribution of G×E, indicating specific adaptability. The environments A12 and A13, in Primavera, are recommended for preliminary selection trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".