MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911336619 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n3p443

Selection Strategies for Grain Quality in Upland Rice Lines

2019· article· en· W2911336619 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Antônio Rosário Neto, Douglas Goulart Castro, Camila S. C. Da Silva, Laís Moretti Tomé, P. Z. Bassinello, Flávia Barbosa Silva Botelho

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRice Cultivation and Yield Improvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas GeraisCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)Index (typography)Randomized block designGrain qualityMathematicsBreeding programUpland riceYield (engineering)Grain yieldAgronomyQuality (philosophy)Agricultural engineeringStatisticsBiotechnologyOryza sativaBiologyComputer scienceEngineeringCultivarMaterials scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The grain quality in rice is extremely important for breeding programs, in order to select lines that meet the standards demanded by the market. The quality attribute is composed by several characteristics, which can make difficult the work for breeder. Thus, the objective in this study was to verify the efficiency of the selection indexes in order to select upland rice lines that meet the grain quality standards. Fourteen lines of the Cultivation and Use Value test (CUV) of the upland rice breeding program of the Federal University of Lavras were evaluated. The experiments were conducted in the municipalities of Lavras-MG and Lambari-MG in the seasons of 2015/2016 and 2016/2017. The experimental was a randomized block design with three replications. The following characteristics were evaluated to compose the indexes: grain yield, minimum cooking time, water absorption index, grain chalkiness, integer grain percentage, grain length and width, apparent amylose content and gelatinization temperature. The following selection indexes were compared: Base index of Willians, Sum of “Ranks” of Mulamb and Mock, and Index Sum of Standardized Variables (Z Index) and also was held direct selection through grain yield. It was observed that the Base index obtained good gains with the selection for grain yield, but it was inefficient for the quality characteristics, results when used direct selection. The Ranks and Z index obtained superior and balanced gains for the characteristics, showing up more efficient in the selection of upland rice lines aiming at the quality of grains.

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 score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicRice Cultivation and Yield ImprovementFrench-language works237,207