MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Combining ability and potential of s1 popcorn progenies for early selection

2022· article· en· W4283369339 on OpenAlexaff
André Luís Bombonato de Oliveira, Cinthia Souza Rodrigues, Guilherme Augusto Peres Silva, Eduardo Sawazaki, Vera Lúcia Nishijima Paes de Barros, Maria Elisa Ayres Guidetti Zagatto Paterniani

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Scientiarum Agronomy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetics and Plant Breeding
Canadian institutionsIngredion (Canada)
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsRandomized block designBonitoDiallel crossSelection (genetic algorithm)BiologyGrain yieldRestricted maximum likelihoodAnimal scienceBreeding programHorticultureMathematicsMaximum likelihoodStatisticsCultivar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaluation of combined ability can eliminate lines that are inefficient and enable the subsequent program steps to be more successful. The objective of this study was to predict the general (gi) and specific (sij) combination ability of popcorn S1 progenies for early selection. A total of 288 topcrosses were performed under a randomized complete block design with two replicates at two sites (Campinas and Capão Bonito, São Paulo State, Brazil). Diallel analyses were performed using mixed models and the maximum likelihood restricted/best unbiased linear prediction method. Evaluated traits included grain yield (GY; kg ha-1), weight of 100 grains (g), and popping expansion (PE; mL g-1). Ear components were also evaluated, including ear length, ear diameter (cm), and the number of grain rows (unit). The S1 progeny 32 presented the highest gi for GY in Campinas, whereas progeny 46 presented the highest gi for GY in Capão Bonito. The S1 progeny, 114 was an important parent for the popcorn breeding program, because it presented high gi for the traits of agronomic interest at both sites. Combination 86×IAC12 exhibited a high sij, and the 86 parent presented the second-highest gi for PE in Campinas, and it should be used for high PE genotypes

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 score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Scientiarum AgronomySame topicGenetics and Plant BreedingFrench-language works237,207