Estimation of Stem-Solidness and Yield Components in Selected Spring Wheat Genotypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solid-stemmed wheat genotypes are better protected from damage caused by wheat stem sawfly (Cephus pygmaeus L.) larvae and at lower risk of lodging, as they are additionally strengthened. The aim of the study was to analyse the stem-solidness of fifty spring wheat cultivars with pith. A field experiment was conducted at the Agricultural Research Station Dłoń, Poland in the years 2012–2014. The method recommended by the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) and the methodology described by DePauw and Read were used to analyse the stem-solidness. The statistical analysis of the results showed that the stems of the wheat cultivars differed in their, therefore, they were divided into seven classes. There were nine Polish cultivars, two genotypes from Canada (BW 597 and AC Elsa) and one Portuguese genotype (I 836) with hollow stems. There were only nine solid-stemmed cultivars. Both methodologies were used to assess the filling of the stem in the whole plant upon analysis of its filling at the cross-section of the first internode. Both methods gave the same results. The DePauw and Read methodology showed that the internodes in the lower part of the plants were filled to the greatest extent. The same genotypes collected in the consecutive years of the study differed in the filling of their stems with pith. These differences were influenced by the environmental conditions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".