Identification of traits underpinning good breadmaking performance of wheat grown with reduced nitrogen fertilisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nitrogen fertiliser is the major input and cost for wheat production, being required to support the development of the canopy to maximise yield and for the synthesis of the gluten proteins that are necessary for breadmaking. Consequently, current high-yielding cultivars require the use of nitrogen fertilisation levels above the yield optimum to achieve the grain protein content needed for breadmaking. This study aimed to reduce this requirement by identifying traits that allow the use of lower levels of nitrogen fertiliser to produce wheat for breadmaking. RESULTS: ) application of nitrogen. Bulked grain samples from four sites per year were milled and white flours were baked using three types of breadmaking process. This identified five cultivars that consistently exhibited good breadmaking quality when grown with the lower nitrogen application. Chemical and biochemical analyses showed that the five cultivars were characterised by exhibiting grain protein deviation (GPD) and high dough elasticity. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to develop novel types of wheat that exhibit good breadmaking quality by selecting for GPD and high dough strength. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".