MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909553073 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n2p100

Methods of Soybean Genotypes Selection in Paraná State, Brazil

2019· article· en· W2909553073 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lorena Moreira Lara, Michel Esper Neto, Hugo Zeni Neto, Alessandro Lucca Braccini, Fernanda Brunetta Godinho Anghinoni, Rayssa Fernanda dos Santos, Luiz H. S. Lima, Alexandre Garcia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoybean genetics and cultivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade Estadual de MaringáConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsCultivarAdaptabilityCropAgronomyBiologyGrowing seasonMathematicsSelection (genetic algorithm)HorticultureGene–environment interactionGenotypeEcologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The soybean crop presents several cultivars available. The performance of each cultivar in the field is associated with its genetic characteristics and the interaction of these with environment. Specific recommendations according to environment are made soybean cultivars release based on adaptability and stability analyzes. This research evaluated twelve soybean cultivars in the northern region of Paraná State Brazil, in order to recommend the most suitable and stable cultivar. The experiment was designed in complete randomized blocks four sites: Maringá, Floresta, Cambé and Apucarana, with four replications, in 2017/2018 growing season. Totaling 48 experimental units per site, that is, a total of 192 in the experiment. The variables evaluated were: one thousand grain mass, productivity, hectoliter weight, number of pods per plant and number of grains per plant. The cultivars were evaluated for adaptability and stability by the methodologies proposed by Lin and Binns (1988) and a bi-segmented regression method according to Cruz et al. (1989). The results indicated that the selection was more reliable when the two methodologies were used, due to their correlation coefficients. Soybean cultivar 3 presented promising behavior in regions studied.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicSoybean genetics and cultivationFrench-language works237,207