Influence of genotype and environment on the flour and bread baking properties of peas and lentils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and objectives Understanding the influence of genotype (G) and environment (E) on the compositional, functional, and baking properties of pulse flours is important for expanding their use as alternative plant‐based ingredients. The objective of this research was to examine the effects of G, E, and their interaction (GxE) on flour and bread properties of peas (yellow and red) and lentils (red and green). Findings For both peas and lentils, main effects of G and/or E were observed for most of the flour and bread parameters including sensory properties. Significant GxE effects were also observed for some of the flour and bread parameters. Conclusions Both G and E influenced the flour and bread baking properties of peas and lentils. To ensure consistent flour quality and to meet flour specifications, G and E should be considered when sourcing peas and lentils for flour production. Significance and novelty The findings from this research greatly advance our understanding of the importance of G and E on the quality of pea and lentil flours and their baking performance.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".