MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966647898 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n14p23

Adaptability and Stability in Maize Populations

2019· article· en· W2966647898 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jeeder Fernando Naves Pinto, Willame dos Santos Cândido, Jefferson Fernando Naves Pinto, Edésio Fialho dos Reis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetics and Plant Breeding
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptabilityLatosolPopulationAgronomyCropStability (learning theory)Environmental scienceBiologyEcologyComputer scienceSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maize plays an important role in the national and global economy, continuously increasing its total production due to advances in technology and access to new land areas. Thus, new sources of germplasm are fundamental to generate cultivars more adapted to the diversity of environments and planting times. The objective of this study was to evaluate 36 populations of maize in three environments, aiming to identify the existence of genotype-by-environment interaction, classify populations based on adaptability and stability using the methods of regression and mixed models, indicate the best populations, and compare the two methodologies. The environments evaluated were: E1-second crop (safrinha) season of 2016 in an experimental area of latosol, with incidence of water stress; E2-crop season 2016/2017 in sandy soil, in family farm area; and E3-crop season 2016/2017 in an experimental area of latosol, no incidence of water stress. Grain yield was evaluated, adaptability and stability analysis was performed. Population 36 achieved high productivity, adaptability and general stability in three tested environments. Both methodologies showed similar results regarding adaptability and stability of some populations in three environments, but mixed models were more suitable for providing better selective accuracy.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.548
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicGenetics and Plant BreedingFrench-language works237,207