MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4211074499 · doi:10.1002/9781405181099.k0104

Barley

2008· other· en· W4211074499 on OpenAlexaff
S. Ganeshan, Ravindra N. Chibbar, Lynn S. Dahleen, Janice Tranberg, Peggy G. Lemaux

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsAg-West Bio (Canada)University of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHordeum vulgareTransformation (genetics)BiologyBiotechnologyComputational biologyGeneGeneticsAgronomyPoaceae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The value of barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.) has steadily gained importance over the years. The economic and consumer importance of barley is constantly being re‐evaluated as new market niches and end‐uses become evident. Improvement strategies have generally employed conventional breeding methods, including mutation‐breeding approaches. However newer technology‐driven improvement strategies offer promising new perspectives and include genetic transformation. Barley was generally recalcitrant to tissue culture and transformation, but is now fairly amenable to genetic transformation by particle bombardment as well as by Agrobacterium . Target traits for modification have encompassed malting, nutritional and disease‐resistance attributes in barley. However, with the emerging trends in high‐throughput genomic sequencing and the need for functional validation of cloned genes, genetic transformation of barley has become an important tool and use of approaches such as transposable elements mediated transformation offers the possibility of producing large numbers of transgenic barley plants. Approaches based on the RNAi technology are also likely to advance understanding of the functions of cloned genes in barley. In this chapter, there is a wide‐ranging discussion on barley genetic transformation, prospects, challenges and risk assessment and environmental concerns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1480.140

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant tissue culture and regeneration→French-language works237,207→