MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989625828 · doi:10.1111/pbr.12716

Genetic analysis of photosynthesis‐related traits in faba bean (<i>Vicia faba</i>) for crop improvement

2019· article· en· W2989625828 on OpenAlexaff
Hamid Khazaeı, Damian Wach, A. Pecio, Albert Vandenberg, Frederick L. Stoddard

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Breeding · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetic and Environmental Crop Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersEmil Aaltosen SäätiöKansainvälisen Liikkuvuuden ja Yhteistyön Keskus
KeywordsVicia fabaBiologyPhotosynthesisCanopyQuantitative trait locusAgronomyChlorophyllCultivarBotanyHorticultureGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Increasing productivity through improvement of photosynthesis in faba bean breeding programmes requires understanding of the genetic control of photosynthesis‐related traits. Hence, we investigated the gene action of leaf area, gas exchange traits, canopy temperature, chlorophyll content, chlorophyll fluorescence parameters and biomass. We chose inbred lines derived from cultivars 'Aurora' (Sweden) and 'Mélodie' (France) along with an Andean accession, ILB 938, crossed them (Aurora/2 × Mélodie/2, ILB 938/2 × Aurora/2 and Mélodie/2 × ILB 938/2), and prepared the six standard generations for quantitative analysis (P 1 , P 2 , F 1 , F 2 , B 1 , and B 2 ). Gene action was complex for each trait, involving additive and dominance gene actions and interactions. Additive gene action was important for SPAD, photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance and F v /F m . Dominance effect was important for biomass production. It is suggested that breeders selecting for productivity can maximize genetic gain by selecting early generations for canopy temperature, SPAD and F v /F m , then later generations for biomass. The information on genetics of various contributing traits of photosynthesis will assist plant breeders in choosing an appropriate breeding strategy for enhancing productivity in faba bean.

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)0.000
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 score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant BreedingSame topicGenetic and Environmental Crop StudiesFrench-language works237,207