MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sources of economically valuable traits for covered oat breeding

2016· article· en· W2903620010 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
I.I. Rusakova, Г. А. Баталова, Yu.E. Vedernikov, M.V. Tuljakova

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural science Euro-North-East · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Productivity and Crop Improvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResistance (ecology)Abiotic componentBiologyAgronomyMaturity (psychological)Grain yieldGrain qualityYield (engineering)GeographyEcologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using of genetic diversity is one of the factors of successful oat breeding. Screening of sources with high yield, resistance to abiotic (high soil acidity and drougth) and biotic (pathogens) stressors, early maturity, high grain quality is actual for Volga-Vyatka region. Studies were conducted in contrast climatic conditions on favorable and natural acid (provocative) soil backgrounds in Kirov region. The most promising accessions are 15068 Konkur (Russia) and 14983 Hybrid (Mexico) having resistance to soil acidity and drought and high grain quality. Accessions 15069 Rysak (Russia), 14967 Florida 657 (USA), and 15082 Ivory (Germany) are recommended to include in crossing with adaptive varieties of local breeding. Sources are selected having high resistanse to soil acidity and high grain quality: 15065 Irtysh (Russia), Yakov (Russia), 15127 SW Betania (Sweden), 15052 Rigja (Norway), 14966 Winter Dum (South Africa) etc. For breeding to early maturity accessions 22h10 Eaton (Russia), 14964 Zwarte president (Netherlands), 15257 RA 7836-416, 15258 RA 7836-2701, 15264 RA 7967-11690, 14620 Newman (USA), 15111 L-15 (Colombia), 15027 C.I. 9101 (Turkey), 14991 ОА 309 (Canada) etc are recommended as paternal forms. Sources of high grain quality and resistance to pathogens are 15184 AC-7 (Russia), 14970 Illinois 62-1532 (USA), 14535 Urano Inia (Chile) etc.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural science Euro-North-EastSame topicAgricultural Productivity and Crop ImprovementFrench-language works237,207