MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200452447 · doi:10.3390/foods10122992

Effect of Kernel Size and Its Potential Interaction with Genotype on Key Quality Traits of Durum Wheat

2021· article· en· W4200452447 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kun Wang, Dale Taylor, Yu‐Ming Chen, Jerry Suchy, Bin Xiao Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueFoods · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest weightGenotypeKernel (algebra)Yield (engineering)Food scienceHorticultureCultivarMathematicsAgronomyBiologyMaterials scienceGeneGeneticsComposite materialPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was conducted to evaluate the influence of kernel size and its potential interaction with genotype on durum wheat quality with emphases on kernel physical characteristics, milling performance, and color-related quality parameters. Wheat samples of seven genotypes, selected from the 2018 Canadian durum variety registration trial, were segregated into large (LK), medium (MK), and small-sized kernels (SK). In general, the kernel size greatly affected the durum wheat milling performance. Within a given size fraction, a strong impact of genotype was shown on the test weight of SK and the milling yields of MK and LK. Particularly, the MK fraction, segregated from the genotypes with superior milling quality, had a higher semolina yield than LK from the genotypes of inferior milling quality, inferring the importance of intrinsic physicochemical properties of durum kernels in affecting milling quality. SK exhibited inferior milling quality regardless of the genotypes selected. A strong impact of genotype was shown for the total yellow pigment (TYP) content and yellowness of semolina, while the kernel size had a significant impact on the brightness and redness of the semolina and pasta. Despite SK possessing much higher TYP, the semolina and pasta prepared from SK were lower in brightness and yellowness but with elevated redness.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFoodsSame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207