MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231503771 · doi:10.18699/icg-plantgen2019-67

Challenges and opportunities of breeding and genetic improvement of durum wheat in Russia

2019· article· en· W4231503771 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P. N. Malchikov, М. А. Розова, А И Зиборов, М. G. Myasnikova, T. V. Chakheeva

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Productivity and Crop Improvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPowdery mildewCultivarGermplasmAgronomyBiologyGlutenGrain qualityPlant breedingRust (programming language)Resistance (ecology)BiotechnologyFood scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Favorable soil and climatic environments of Russia are not sufficiently used for the production of high-quality grain of durum wheat. It is caused by a lower efficiency of its cultivation compared to other cereals. The development of varieties adapted to environmental fluctuations in the zones of their cultivation, with high grain quality, is taken as one of the major factor to solve the problem. Based on many-year experiments a breeding strategy for adaptation is suggested. It roots in the possibility to reinforce specific (regional) homeostasis with the genetic systems of cultivars living on a vast area, which are carriers of non-specific homeostasis, as well to increase resistance to diseases (foliar blights, blotches, stem rust, powdery mildew) and to lodging. Ways to enhance grain quality due to the use of germplasm with high levels of protein, gluten and carotenoid content are put forward. Problems of strengthening gluten quality of Russian durum wheat cultivars are discussed. For these purposes, cultivars from Italy, Canada and Australia should be widely used as basic material and the corresponding biochemical markers of the GLi-B1d, Glu-B1d, Glu-A3d loci would be quite valuable.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAgricultural Productivity and Crop ImprovementFrench-language works237,207