Predictive microbial-based modelling of wheat yields and grain baking quality across a 500 km transect in Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crops yield and quality are difficult to predict using soil physico-chemical parameters. Because of their key roles in nutrient cycles, we hypothesized that there is an untapped predictive potential in the soil microbial communities. To test our hypothesis, we sampled soils across 80 wheat fields of the province of Quebec at the beginning of the growing season in May-June. We used a wide array of methods to characterize the microbial communities, their functions and activities, including: (1) amplicon sequencing, (2) real-time PCR quantification and (3) community-level substrate utilization. We also measured grain yield and quality at the end of the growing season, and key soil parameters at sampling. The diversity of fungi, the abundance of nitrification genes and the use of specific organic carbon sources were often the best predictors for wheat yield and grain quality. Using 11 or less parameters, we were able to explain 64-90% of the variation in wheat yield and grain and flour quality across the province of Quebec. Microbial-based regression models outperformed basic soil-based models for predicting wheat quality indicators. Our results suggest that the measurement of microbial parameters early in the season could help predict accurately grain quality and quantity.
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".