Estimation of barley collection samples on resistance to osmotic stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article provides the results of studies on estimation of 50 covered and 37 naked barley collection samples on resistance to osmotic stress. The estimation was done in laboratory conditions. Sucrose with concentration corresponded to pressure of 14 atmospheres was used as osmotic solution. Artificial drought significantly reduced seed germination of most samples. Compared to the control, under osmotic stress only 1.0% of samples had single germinated seeds on the 3-d day of the experiment. Laboratory estimation has shown that differences on germination ability under osmotic stress do not depend on the place of sample origin. For example, among samples from Great Britain there were both forms with resistance higher than average (Canasta) and sensitive to osmotic stress (Crusades). Weak significant correlation was pointed out between drought resistance in laboratory experiment and field productivity (r = 0.28). More close relation was established between resistance to osmotic stress and number of grain in the ear (r = 0.52) as well as ear productivity (r = 0.53). Resistant to osmotic stress samples more than 30% exceeded a standard variety by productivity under drought conditions. For further breeding activity drought resistant samples were selected: of husked barley - Tandem, Chelyabinsky 96, Chelyabinsky 99, Sonet (Russia), Firlbeks Union (Switzerland), Lamba (Denmark), Canasta (Great Britain), Buck (Canada), Bonita (Argentina); of naked barley - Omsky golozerny 1 (Russia), CBSS06YCA 0044S, CBSS06YCA 0019S, CBSS06YCA 0018S (Canada), Azure (USA), k-18079 Local (India).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".