Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diallel crosses have been used in genetic research to determine the inheritance of important traits among a set of genotypes and to identify superior parents for hybrid or cultivar development. Conventional diallel analysis is limited to partitioning the total variation of the data into general combining ability (GCA) of each genotype and specific combining ability (SCA) of each cross. In this paper we formulate a biplot approach for graphical diallel analysis. The biplot is constructed by the first two principal components (PCs) derived from subjecting the tester‐centered diallel data to singular value decomposition. It displays the most important entry by tester patterns of the data and allows the following information to be extracted visually: (i) GCA of each genotype; (ii) SCA of each genotype; (iii) groups of parents with similar genetics; and (iv) superior hybrids. In addition, the biplot allows hypotheses to be formulated concerning the genetics of the genotypes. Three published diallel data sets of wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) and maize ( Zea mays L.) were used to demonstrate the biplot approach and detailed procedures were provided for constructing and interpreting a biplot.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".