MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900847290 · doi:10.26577/eb-2018-3-1342

Biochemical screening of the domestic and world prosa millet collection on the content of amilose in grain

2018· article· en· W2900847290 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Аiman Rysbekova, E. N. Dusibaeva, Irina Zhirnova, Gulzat Esenbekova, A. I. Seytkhozhaev, A. Ye. Zhakenova

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental biology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFood composition and properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmyloseBiologyFood scienceAgronomyAnimal scienceChemistryStarch

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amylose is the most important biochemical indicator of grain quality in cereals. In this research are presented the results of biochemical screening for the quantitative amylose content in grain of 112 proso millet samples domestic and world collections (Afghanistan, Belgium, Hungary, China, Canada, India, Iran, Mexico, Pakistan, Russia, USA, Turkey, Ukraine, France). On the basis of the obtained data was made conditional classification of proso millet collection on amylose content. The results of biochemical screening of proso millet genotypes showed that the studied samples have different by the amylose content and their number varied from 5.5 to 34.90%. In domestic samples the amylose content ranged from 14.6% to 34.8%. A low amylose content were shown samples K-3742, PI 436626 (Lung Shu 18), PI 436625 (Lung Shu 16) and Ma zha Yan, averaging from 5.5 to 5.9%. Selected samples represent valuable genetic material for the creation of glutinous proso millet varieties and will be involved in the breeding process. On the basis of the conditional classification, it was found that the amylose content was higher than 25% (high amylose) in 68% of the studied samples , 23% were medium-amylose (15-25%) groups, and only 5% and 4% were low-amylose (6-14%) and glutinous (to 6%) groups, respectively. Key words: millet, collection, amylose, screening, classification.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental biologySame topicFood composition and propertiesFrench-language works237,207