MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294833207 · doi:10.1111/1467-8489.12491

Adaptability and variety adoption: Implications for plant breeding policy in a changing climate

2022· article· en· W4294833207 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohammad Torshizi, Richard Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Innovations and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptabilityVariety (cybernetics)Climate changeVolatility (finance)BusinessEconomicsMarketingBiologyMathematicsEconometricsEcologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Adaptability of a seed variety to a wide range of environmental conditions is important in farmers' variety adoption decisions, especially with the increased environmental volatility induced by climate change. Despite the apparent need for information, variety trial reports generally report average relative yields, but they do not provide farmers with measures of variety adaptability. Our theoretical model postulates that the adaptability of seed varieties matters in farmers' variety adoption choices. To test this conjecture, and to measure the magnitude of the effect, we develop a new measure of variety adaptability and estimate an empirical model of adoption in Western Canada. We find that a 1% increase in the adaptability of a variety will increase its adoption by 0.45%. This effect is statistically and economically significant. Our results imply that adding a measure of variety adaptability to crop variety guides could enhance the adoption of superior crop varieties, benefiting both farmers and breeders.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of Agricultural and Resource EconomicsSame topicAgricultural Innovations and PracticesFrench-language works237,207