MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198633361 · doi:10.5539/jps.v10n2p39

Enset (Enset ventricosum (Welw.) Cheesman) Breeding for Various Purposes - A Review

2021· review· en· W3198633361 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Getachew Etana Gemechu, Samrawit Silas Simmon, Efrem Asfaw

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plant Studies · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBanana Cultivation and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCultivarGermplasmCropBiologyInoculationHorticultureAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enset (Enset ventricosum (Welw) Cheesman) is a well-known cultivated crop in Ethiopia and a cultural staple food for over 20 million humans in different parts of Ethiopia. It bears flowers that developed into fruits and seeds. It bears seeds and propagated vegetativly. Attempts have been done for maintenance, conservation, improving cultivars, diversity, and variability study. About 623 Enset germplasm were collected from 12 main growing areas and ex-situ conserved at Areka. Seeds of Enset were stored at the millennium gene bank. Seedlings and specimens are held in the garden of Cambridge Cottage and Wakehurst. In the research effort 6 cultivars: 3 early set cultivars: Yanbulle, Gewada, Endale, and 3 late set cultivars: Kelisa, Zerita, Mesena were released. Variability study revealed that corn yields were significantly affected by location, cultivar, and cultivar Vs location. Genotypes: Suite, Warke, Bidu, Astera, and Kekari showed 100% disease symptoms after 30 days of inoculation. Symptoms weren't observed on Meziya, Bedadet, Hiniba, and Nech Enset clones after 90 days of inoculation. ISSRs primers revealed that, in all parameters, Kefficho genotypes have been more diversified than genotypes from Essera areas. The Partitioning of Shannon's diversity index indicated that the major variations were occurred within populations than between the two populations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.293
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.123 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plant StudiesSame topicBanana Cultivation and ResearchFrench-language works237,207