Rice Quality Evaluating and Key Quality Genes Genotyping of Rice Germplasm Resources from Africa and Brazil
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High quality is one of the most objectives in rice breeding, and introducing and evaluating the quality of rice germplasm are very important for screening novel parent with high quality and breeding high quality varieties. In this study, a total of 28 rice germplasm from Africa and Brazil were evaluated their milling quality, appearance quality and cooking and eating quality in Wuhan City, Hubei Province. The results showed the milling quality and appearance quality of most varieties were very high, but the cooking and eating quality of them were bad. Finally, 13 varieties with high quality were screened. The correlation analysis indicated that different traits among milling quality, appearance quality and cooking and eating quality had low correlation between each other. Further, all germplasm was genotyping three important quality genes, GS3 , Wx and ALK . There were two genotypes in each of GS3 and Wx , and ALK had three genotypes. The phenotypes showed significantly difference between different genotypes for both Wx and ALK . Our results will give valuable germplasm resources, gene resources and marker resources for breeding high quality rice varieties.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it