The Effect of Stem Diameter on the <i>Brassica napus</i> (Type: Canola) (Cultivar: HYHEAR 3) Fiber Quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A matured canola plant has different types of stems based on the diameter, such as narrow (immature), medium (mature), and wide (over mature). Therefore, this study was focused on investigating the properties of the extracted canola (HYREAR 3) fibers from 3 different diameter of stems (narrow, medium and wide). The physical (average length, aspect ratio, contact angle, and moisture regain) and mechanical (load at break, elongation at break, tensile stress, young’s modulus, and tenacity) properties of fibers were measured. ANOVA showed that stem diameter had effects on all fiber properties except for average length and elongation at break. Fiber diameter also had significant effects on load at break, elongation at break, aspect ratio, tensile stress, and young’s modulus. In corrgram, it was found that tensile stress, young’s modulus, and aspect ratio were negatively correlated to fiber diameter whereas load at break and tenacity were positively associated. Mean values showed that stem diameter had effects on all fiber properties except for average length. The mean values of fiber diameter, load at break, elongation at break, tenacity, and contact angle were highest and the lowest mean values were observed for tensile stress, young’s modulus and aspect ratio in fibers of 7 - 10 mm stems (medium matured), hence found to be less stiff. Moisture regain ability showed that canola fibers isolated from ≥8 mm stem diameter were more hydrophobic whereas contact angle measurement showed relatively more hydrophobic nature of 7 - 10 mm stem fibers. Therefore, this study provided an insightful understanding of the quality of the canola fibers of different stems which will ultimately help to choose the best stem to extract different qualities of fibers for commercial uses.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".