MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360992862 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2205769120

The next era of crop domestication starts now

2023· article· en· W4360992862 on OpenAlexaff
Aubrey Streit Krug, Emily B. M. Drummond, David L. Van Tassel, Emily Warschefsky

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSeed and Plant Biochemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomesticationFood securityAgricultural biodiversityAnthropoceneDiversity (politics)AgroforestryAgroecosystemCroppingEcosystem servicesFood systemsFlanneryBiotechnologyGeographyBiologyEnvironmental resource managementAgricultureEcologyPolitical scienceEcosystemEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current food systems are challenged by relying on a few input-intensive, staple crops. The prioritization of yield and the loss of diversity during the recent history of domestication has created contemporary crops and cropping systems that are ecologically unsustainable, vulnerable to climate change, nutrient poor, and socially inequitable. For decades, scientists have proposed diversity as a solution to address these challenges to global food security. Here, we outline the possibilities for a new era of crop domestication, focused on broadening the palette of crop diversity, that engages and benefits the three elements of domestication: crops, ecosystems, and humans. We explore how the suite of tools and technologies at hand can be applied to renew diversity in existing crops, improve underutilized crops, and domesticate new crops to bolster genetic, agroecosystem, and food system diversity. Implementing the new era of domestication requires that researchers, funders, and policymakers boldly invest in basic and translational research. Humans need more diverse food systems in the Anthropocene-the process of domestication can help build them.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.011
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations80
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicSeed and Plant BiochemistryFrench-language works237,207