MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406714875 · doi:10.1016/j.xplc.2025.101260

Agricultural landscape genomics to increase crop resilience

2025· review· en· W4406714875 on OpenAlexaff
Quinn Campbell, James A Bedford, Yue Yu, Anna McCormick, Nora P Castañeda Álvarez, Bryan C. Runck, Jeffrey Neyhart, Patrick M. Ewing, Daniel Ortíz-Barrientos, Lexuan Gao, Diane Wang, Mark A. Chapman, Loren H. Rieseberg, Michael B. Kantar

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Communications · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResilience (materials science)GenomicsCropAgricultureEnvironmental resource managementGeographyAgroforestryBiologyEnvironmental scienceAgronomyEcologyGenomeGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Populations are continually adapting to their environment. Knowledge of which populations and individuals harbor unique and agriculturally useful variations has the potential to accelerate crop adaptation to the increasingly challenging environments predicted for the coming century. Landscape genomics, which identifies associations between environmental and genomic variation, provides a means for obtaining this knowledge. However, despite extensive efforts to assemble and characterize ex situ collections of crops and their wild relatives, gaps remain in the genomic and environmental datasets needed to robustly implement this approach. This article outlines the history of landscape genomics, which, to date, has mainly been used in conservation and evolutionary studies, provides an overview of crops and wild relative collections that have the necessary data for implementation and identifies areas where new data generation is needed. We find that 60% of the crops covered by the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture lack the data necessary to conduct this kind of analysis, necessitating identification of crops in need of more collections, sequencing, or phenotyping. By highlighting these aspects, we aim to help develop agricultural landscape genomics as a sub-discipline that brings together evolutionary genetics, landscape ecology, and plant breeding, ultimately enhancing the development of resilient and adaptable crops for future environmental challenges.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant CommunicationsSame topicGenetically Modified Organisms ResearchFrench-language works237,207