Stability analysis of stem solidness, grain yield, and grain protein concentration in spring wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The wheat stem sawfly, Cephus cinctus Norton (Hymenoptera: Cephidae), is a major pest of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in the northern Great Plains, where it is a constant threat in Montana and is resurging in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and North Dakota. Adoption of solid-stemmed cultivars is an important management tool for wheat growers; however, the inconsistent pith expression first noted with the release of ‘Rescue’ has been repeatedly observed in modern cultivars such as ‘Lillian’ in Canada. Given the extensive hectares planted to solid-stemmed wheat cultivars during an outbreak, the identification of cultivars that display stable stem solidness, grain yield, and grain protein concentration across a wide range of environments where stem sawfly infestations occur is desirable. We assessed spring wheat plant responses in eight solid-stemmed and two hollow-stemmed genotypes grown across diverse environments using multiple statistical models. Study sites included southern Alberta and Saskatchewan, Montana, and North Dakota. Most models agreed that the genotypes ‘Choteau’, ‘BW925’, and ‘Mott’ consistently displayed high and stable stem solidness concomitant with high grain yield. ‘Choteau’ and ‘BW925’ also consistently met or exceeded the desired threshold of a 3.75/5 pith rating (averaged from the lower four stem internodes) for optimum resistance, whereas ‘Mott’ developed optimal pith at a specific (early) phenological stage when resistance to wheat stem sawfly infestation is critical. Exploring the stability of stem solidness identified ideal genotypes that would enhance germplasm development efforts, which exemplifies how this approach can facilitate the selection, production, and adoption of solid-stemmed wheat cultivars in regions prone to wheat stem sawfly attack.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".