Bibliographic record
Abstract
fatty acid ratio which has subsequently bred true-to-type, but with lower pod yield.Pedigree selection was practiced within the F 2 , F 3 , and F 4 populations of the GA-C330A/GA-T2636M cross combination for high O/L fatty acid ratio, desirable pod shape, seed size, testa color, growth habit, maturity, high yield and grade characteristics.Since tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV) was naturally occurring during these early segregating generations, individual plants were also selected for TSWV resistance.Performance testing was begun in the F 4:6 generation with the advanced pure-line selection, GA 942007.Georgia Hi-O/L is unique from virginia-type peanut cultivars in having a significantly higher O/L fatty acid ratio (about 40 vs 3) as compared with 'NC 7' ( 5) in south Georgia.The high O/L trait provides for longer shelf-life, improved oil quality, and better nutrition.Georgia Hi-O/L has a high level of resistance to TSWV being comparable to 'Georgia Green' (2), which is a TSWV-resistant runner-type cultivar.Georgia Hi-O/L also has a decumbent spreading growth habit, medium maturity, and pink testa color.Georgia Hi-O/L combines high yield, high O/L ratio, and high level of TSWV resistance into a large-seeded cultivar.In 26 tests conducted at multiple locations in the southeastern USA from 1996 to 1998, Georgia Hi-O/L was found to be significantly higher in pod yield per hectare, by approximately 20%, over NC 7. It also produced a significantly higher grade percentage of total sound mature kernels than NC 7. In Georgia during three years (1996)(1997)(1998), Georgia Hi-O/L was found to be significantly higher in yield and grade when compared to NC-V 11(6), VA-C 92R(4), NC 12C(3), and NC 7.No significant difference was found between Georgia Hi-O/L and NC 7 for percentage of extra large kernels (ELK), protein content, oil content, and roasted flavor.However, Georgia Hi-O/L does have a significantly greater number of sound mature seed count as compared to NC 7 (1232 vs 1 071 kg' 1 ).U.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".