Editorial: Advances in conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advances in conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources BackgroundWe made a broad call for perspective papers, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or traditional research papers on topics related to conservation and use of plant genetic resources.We invited to present advances in characterization and evaluation, strategies to improve gene bank operations and collaboration, new tools for managing and sharing information, or novel knowledge of conservation gaps.We especially encouraged contributions on underutilized crops and crops wild relatives.We received 58 positive responses, whereof 20 finalized their submissions and passed the review process with a total of 125 authors included in the accepted papers.Our motivation was to assemble contributions underlining that genetic resources are essential for crop improvement, which is achieved via plant breeding and release of new varieties that farmers cand access and use.We see that future crops need to produce high and stable yields but also be of high nutritional quality.They must adapt to shifting climates and support a sustainable agricultural or horticultural production avoiding negative environmental impacts.In addition, we need to contribute to efforts to avoid the loss of biodiversity, including the genetic resources of crop plants and crop wild relatives, which are in our focus.We are aware that there is a large body of research and literature on this, because plant breeders in the late 19 th century already imitated research and conservation activities which serve the same purpose and they recognized the loss of biodiversity, albeit not using this term.However, the global biodiversity crisis has become much bigger and globally recognized and any additional step, any additional insight addressing this topic is worth to be shared.At the same time more and more genomic tools and other technologies are available to add to our understanding of diversity and can support conservation and target promising germplasm for further research and breeding.We hope this special edition will be a small additional step in a positive direction, part of the evolutionary process of coping with the grand challenges we all face.
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 | 0.011 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.015 |
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".