Agricultural landscape genomics to increase crop resilience
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it